Life as a unicorn Forum

[IAFG]

Yeah I went too far. Not where they (necessarily) end up to the extent that they are looking for the most selective and prestigious firm, "a legal job that represents one of the best possible entry-level outcomes from even the highest-ranked law schools."

[Ricky-Bobby]

Was this sarcasm? This was sarcasm, wasn't it?

No it wasn't sarcasm. I pulled 50 hour weeks for two month straight and while that doesn't sound like much- the cubicle will crush your soul (Especially when you have pissed off clients)

I had a picture of a Steve Jobs quote on my desktop."If today was the last day of your life would you want to be doing what you're about to do today" The answer was no 99% of the time.

lol

Currently on hour 49 of this week and still have half of today and tomorrow to go. My soul is thoroughly un-crushed, and I have plenty of time to see my family. Do you sleep 12 hours a night?

ETA: Sorry, this came across snarkier than I intended. I don't know your job or what you do, so 50 hours at it could totally be soul-crushing. I don't mean to imply it isn't. I just rejected the notion that 50 hours anywhere is awful.

[abl]

At my HYS, V5 positions were not the most desired -- even when compared to other biglaw. Boies, Munger, Irell, maybe Quinn, and a bunch of the elite DC offices (Sidley, Jenner, etc) were generally more sought-after than V5 firms for litigation, which is where most of the gunners seemed to go.

But I'm not sure that those even really qualify as unicorn jobs -- those are positions that being roughly top 1/3 made you competitive for. The positions that you had to be top 5%-10% to get were Susman, Keker, Kellog Huber, Bartlit Beck, some of the super-desirable PI (that as someone else here mentioned are sufficiently random to be difficult to say which specifically they were), and maybe the top plaintiffs firms (Lieff Cabraser, Cohen Milstein, Korein Tillery, etc). Oh, and everyone's always jealous of the couple people out of every class who make it big doing some form of venture capital / startup sort of work -- although that obviously isn't really grades-focused. And I think academia probably qualifies, but that's a bit more difficult to include here because that doesn't really become an option for a couple years post-graduation.

None of these options that I listed individually drew more than one or two people from my school each year (well, other than academia). But they do add up -- in the aggregate, I'd say probably between 5-10% of my class (~25% if you include the desired biglaw offices) annually seemed to get jobs that were (a) incredibly competitive, (b) widely desired, and (c) generally regarded to be very rewarding.

[StateSeal]

Was this sarcasm? This was sarcasm, wasn't it?

No it wasn't sarcasm. I pulled 50 hour weeks for two month straight and while that doesn't sound like much- the cubicle will crush your soul (Especially when you have pissed off clients)

I had a picture of a Steve Jobs quote on my desktop."If today was the last day of your life would you want to be doing what you're about to do today" The answer was no 99% of the time.

lol

Currently on hour 49 of this week and still have half of today and tomorrow to go. My soul is thoroughly un-crushed, and I have plenty of time to see my family. Do you sleep 12 hours a night?

ETA: Sorry, this came across snarkier than I intended. I don't know your job or what you do, so 50 hours at it could totally be soul-crushing. I don't mean to imply it isn't. I just rejected the notion that 50 hours anywhere is awful.

Yes, long work weeks can be non-soul crushing, even exhilarating. In general, though, there's a valid point to be made here that folks too casually throw around the notion that working 60(+) hours a week for an indefinite span of one's career is no big deal. The 40 hour work week is one of labor history's best developments. I like to spend time exercising, socializing, reading, enjoying cultural activities, and hanging out with my family -- basically, the normal things that help make life great.

[UnicornHunter]

Was this sarcasm? This was sarcasm, wasn't it?

No it wasn't sarcasm. I pulled 50 hour weeks for two month straight and while that doesn't sound like much- the cubicle will crush your soul (Especially when you have pissed off clients)

I had a picture of a Steve Jobs quote on my desktop."If today was the last day of your life would you want to be doing what you're about to do today" The answer was no 99% of the time.

lol

Currently on hour 49 of this week and still have half of today and tomorrow to go. My soul is thoroughly un-crushed, and I have plenty of time to see my family. Do you sleep 12 hours a night?

ETA: Sorry, this came across snarkier than I intended. I don't know your job or what you do, so 50 hours at it could totally be soul-crushing. I don't mean to imply it isn't. I just rejected the notion that 50 hours anywhere is awful.

To be fair, much more time to see the family when a 12+hour day starts at 0600 instead of 9:30 am. You just have to learn to love <5 hours of sleep.

[rayiner]

Was this sarcasm? This was sarcasm, wasn't it?

No it wasn't sarcasm. I pulled 50 hour weeks for two month straight and while that doesn't sound like much- the cubicle will crush your soul (Especially when you have pissed off clients)

I had a picture of a Steve Jobs quote on my desktop."If today was the last day of your life would you want to be doing what you're about to do today" The answer was no 99% of the time.

lol

Currently on hour 49 of this week and still have half of today and tomorrow to go. My soul is thoroughly un-crushed, and I have plenty of time to see my family. Do you sleep 12 hours a night?

ETA: Sorry, this came across snarkier than I intended. I don't know your job or what you do, so 50 hours at it could totally be soul-crushing. I don't mean to imply it isn't. I just rejected the notion that 50 hours anywhere is awful.

To be fair, much more time to see the family when a 12+hour day starts at 0600 instead of 9:30 am. You just have to learn to love <5 hours of sleep.

NYC big law starts at 9:30-10am and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. You work on the schedule your partner/senior associate keeps.

Also, if you're not naturally someone who can make due with 5 hours of sleep on a regular basis, you're not going to will yourself into being able to do it. See: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2013032 ... less-sleep

[NYSprague]

I wish I could ask interviewees if they can function without sleep. It's the primary disqualifying characteristic for big law. But it would scare off people and recruiting would never allow it.

[worldtraveler]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

[jbagelboy]

I wonder if we could develop a theorem and then test via regression for DF-inspired threads to rigorously derive natural convergence. Funny how both threads fell upon the topic of sleep...

[A. Nony Mouse]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

Same here. I know there are people who legit don't need much (a boss used to email me at 4 am), but I am not one of them.

[Otunga]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

Same here. I know there are people who legit don't need much (a boss used to email me at 4 am), but I am not one of them.

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

[Pragmatic Gun]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

Same here. I know there are people who legit don't need much (a boss used to email me at 4 am), but I am not one of them.

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

[chem]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

Same here. I know there are people who legit don't need much (a boss used to email me at 4 am), but I am not one of them.

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

Can't lose those mass gains bro. But I can't lose those mass billings either. A true bro dilemma

[withoutapaddle]

Can't lose those mass gains bro. But I can't lose those mass billings either. A true bro dilemma

Bring the dumbbells to work

[A. Nony Mouse]

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

Sure, but my old boss sleeps 4 hours a night, skis every week, cycles for miles when there's no snow, is in his 60s, and healthy as an ox. He doesn't just tolerate lack of sleep, he thrives on it. I'm sure people like this are rare, but they exist.

[worldtraveler]

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

Sure, but my old boss sleeps 4 hours a night, skis every week, cycles for miles when there's no snow, is in his 60s, and healthy as an ox. He doesn't just tolerate lack of sleep, he thrives on it. I'm sure people like this are rare, but they exist.

My mom is like that. I don't know what the hell happened. I swear I'm adopted.

If I don't get 8 hours I can't form coherent sentences.

[rayiner]

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

Sure, but my old boss sleeps 4 hours a night, skis every week, cycles for miles when there's no snow, is in his 60s, and healthy as an ox. He doesn't just tolerate lack of sleep, he thrives on it. I'm sure people like this are rare, but they exist.

See: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 57910.html.

It's about 1-3% of the population.

[unc0mm0n1]

But it could be that somebody doesn't need a lot of sleep to function well, and it's still detrimental to their health to have a lack of it. Not sure.

This is a major fallacy most people aren't cognizant of. Just because one can tolerate something doesn't mean it isn't to their detriment. Could my body learn to live with only a meal a day? Sure, but it would lead to malnutrition, and my body will drop muscle mass to adapt.

Sure, but my old boss sleeps 4 hours a night, skis every week, cycles for miles when there's no snow, is in his 60s, and healthy as an ox. He doesn't just tolerate lack of sleep, he thrives on it. I'm sure people like this are rare, but they exist.

My mom is like that. I don't know what the hell happened. I swear I'm adopted.

If I don't get 8 hours I can't form coherent sentences.

I'm jealous of this. No matter what time I go to sleep I can't sleep later than 7. I went to bed at 3:30 yesterday (today) and I was up at 6:45. Sometimes I go to sleep early like 10 and sleep till like 6:30 and I feel groggy. I don't see how some people sleep 9-10hrs a day, everyday.

[TheSpanishMain]

I'm jealous of this. No matter what time I go to sleep I can't sleep later than 7. I went to bed at 3:30 yesterday (today) and I was up at 6:45. Sometimes I go to sleep early like 10 and sleep till like 6:30 and I feel groggy. I don't see how some people sleep 9-10hrs a day, everyday.

Same, although it seems to have changed as I've gotten older. When I was in high school/college I could sleep till 11 or noon on a Saturday morning. Now that I'm 30, sleeping in means maybe 8 at the outside. It's not like I force myself to get out of bed, I just naturally wake up and can't get back to sleep.

[wons]

Interesting; I'm the one saying Biglaw isn't as bad as some folks here advertise, and while I'm not one of these super-low 4-5hr sleepers, I'm pretty consistently a 6-6.5hr / night guy, which means I'm comfortable and functional getting 5-5.5 during a busy week and catching back up on the weekend.

I think, FWIW, that makes a huge difference in how much you tolerate Biglaw. Even on a week when I'm doing consistent 9AM-11PM, like this one, that means that when I get home at 11:30 I take an hour, hour and a half to have a drink, fuck around on the internet or watch an episode of a TV show, fall asleep around 1 . . . and then I'm up around 7:30 and ready to go again, fully rested. If I want to sneak in the gym, i just drop down to 6hrs of sleep that day.

I don't know how I would handle my job if I needed 8 hours of sleep a night. I would be like working 2 hours later every night of my life.

[Wiggly]

...

[worldtraveler]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

But see isn't this one of the theoretical problems with BigLaw: people who need sleep can't do it, people who are interested in a wide variety of things/act upon them can't do it, people with families pretty much can't do it and the list goes on. Isn't it bad for a profession to be pushing out people that could be potentially be great? It should want greatness and greatness doesn't always come in 'I work 16 hour days and love it, live off of adder all for energy sometimes, have no other interests/family/spouses'.

[Wiggly]

...

[rayiner]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

But see isn't this one of the theoretical problems with BigLaw: people who need sleep can't do it, people who are interested in a wide variety of things/act upon them can't do it, people with families pretty much can't do it and the list goes on. Isn't it bad for a profession to be pushing out people that could be potentially be great? It should want greatness and greatness doesn't always come in 'I work 16 hour days and love it, live off of adder all for energy sometimes, have no other interests/family/spouses'.

There's probably ~3,500 newly-minted JD's chomping at the bit to get used by big law for a few years graduating from the T14 alone every year. They don't need greatness, they need bodies.

[worldtraveler]

My need for sleep is one of the major reasons I never pursued big law. There are other reasons too but that's definitely top 3.

But see isn't this one of the theoretical problems with BigLaw: people who need sleep can't do it, people who are interested in a wide variety of things/act upon them can't do it, people with families pretty much can't do it and the list goes on. Isn't it bad for a profession to be pushing out people that could be potentially be great? It should want greatness and greatness doesn't always come in 'I work 16 hour days and love it, live off of adder all for energy sometimes, have no other interests/family/spouses'.

There's probably ~3,500 newly-minted JD's chomping at the bit to get used by big law for a few years graduating from the T14 alone every year. They don't need greatness, they need bodies.

Not to mention the majority of law work does not require greatness. It requires a tenacious ability to care about stupid little details hour after hour. I actually feel like people who can go on little sleep are probably best at that.