Incoming Associates Getting Deferred Forum

[Elston Gunn]

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely. They are deferring because it saves money. That’s the whole thing.

[LHand1993]

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely. They are deferring because it saves money. That’s the whole thing.

So Wachtell is deferring (albeit not to the same extent as other firms) to save money? Their partners could take a $2M paycut and still be the highest PPP firm. Firms are going to defer for a number of reasons, with saving money definitely being a factor (for some). The uncertainty with various states' bar exams is another. Hesitance about onboarding the incoming class is absolutely going to be a factor as well, especially when you're talking about an industry where boomers are calling the shots and likely very adverse to onboarding incoming associates remotely for a variety of valid (like the fact that the learning curve is much steeper, as mentioned earlier ITT) and invalid (like a belief that the "culture" can't be embedded remotely or some shit) reasons.

[Anonymous User]

This might have already been discussed (I didn't go back and read 9 pages), but I think deferring until October
(or even January) is problematic. Presumably the deferral decided in order to give the country time to get a handle on Coronavirus and to allow people to start after the October bar exam. However, there is widespread agreement that Coronavirus is going to come back as early as September and linger throughout flu season (all fall and winter).

If a firm is deferring start dates at least in part because of Coronavirus, how is opening back up in the fall/winter--during the second wave--going to solve anything? Doesn't it just open the door for the firms to defer again until the Coronavirus is cured (which could reasonably take over 18 months)?

Yeah, my big fear is that firms will be at least voluntary WFH for most of the next year and a half and that a deferral to January opens the door to further deferrals later on because firms won’t want to onboard new associates remotely. Unfortunately law is not the most progressive profession, and I could certainly see firms thinking it’s too important for cultural or whatever reasons to start everyone in the office, even if that means a long-term deferral.

But, perhaps firms are deferring in part to buy themselves some time to figure out how to onboard new associates remotely. And/or hoping to use the remote summer program as a trial run. I hope so at least. Other industries are doing it and it’s really not that difficult.

Bruh, as someone who lateraled and onboarded remotely to a new firm recently, I can tell you it was a piece of cake. It’s called zoom.

As a lateral who started virtually, do you feel like you were effectively integrated to the group? I'm starting in September and worry that if it's still virtual/WFH, integration will be difficult.

Not at all. Outside the deals I’m working on, I feel like no one in my department has any idea who I am. But who cares?

[barkschool]

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely. They are deferring because it saves money. That’s the whole thing.

So Wachtell is deferring (albeit not to the same extent as other firms) to save money? Their partners could take a $2M paycut and still be the highest PPP firm. Firms are going to defer for a number of reasons, with saving money definitely being a factor (for some). The uncertainty with various states' bar exams is another. Hesitance about onboarding the incoming class is absolutely going to be a factor as well, especially when you're talking about an industry where boomers are calling the shots and likely very adverse to onboarding incoming associates remotely for a variety of valid (like the fact that the learning curve is much steeper, as mentioned earlier ITT) and invalid (like a belief that the "culture" can't be embedded remotely or some shit) reasons.

Management committees are deferring to save cash, the other factors are just window dressing to explain it to associates and the market.

Why pay associates who don’t make the firm money for half a year if they don’t have any pressure to do so.

Also, having the highest ppp (a wildly adjustable metric) isn’t the correct way to look at it. Partners will make choices that don’t reduce year over year disbursements/ Comp to the extent possible. Deferring Associates is the easiest way to slash a budget line.

[Elston Gunn]

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely. They are deferring because it saves money. That’s the whole thing.

So Wachtell is deferring (albeit not to the same extent as other firms) to save money? Their partners could take a $2M paycut and still be the highest PPP firm. Firms are going to defer for a number of reasons, with saving money definitely being a factor (for some). The uncertainty with various states' bar exams is another. Hesitance about onboarding the incoming class is absolutely going to be a factor as well, especially when you're talking about an industry where boomers are calling the shots and likely very adverse to onboarding incoming associates remotely for a variety of valid (like the fact that the learning curve is much steeper, as mentioned earlier ITT) and invalid (like a belief that the "culture" can't be embedded remotely or some shit) reasons.

Wachtell is “deferring” to completely normal start dates in a way that actually makes sense given the delay in the bar exam. If that was firms’ concern, they would follow Wachtell. The firms that are deferring until January are doing it to save money, just as they did during the last recession when offices were still open.

[LHand1993]

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely. They are deferring because it saves money. That’s the whole thing.

So Wachtell is deferring (albeit not to the same extent as other firms) to save money? Their partners could take a $2M paycut and still be the highest PPP firm. Firms are going to defer for a number of reasons, with saving money definitely being a factor (for some). The uncertainty with various states' bar exams is another. Hesitance about onboarding the incoming class is absolutely going to be a factor as well, especially when you're talking about an industry where boomers are calling the shots and likely very adverse to onboarding incoming associates remotely for a variety of valid (like the fact that the learning curve is much steeper, as mentioned earlier ITT) and invalid (like a belief that the "culture" can't be embedded remotely or some shit) reasons.

Wachtell is “deferring” to completely normal start dates in a way that actually makes sense given the delay in the bar exam. If that was firms’ concern, they would follow Wachtell. The firms that are deferring until January are doing it to save money, just as they did during the last recession when offices were still open.

So you're saying that Wachtell and firms that follow and defer to Oct/Nov are doing so because of the bar exam? Seems like you just said that everyone is deferring to solely save money.

I'm not saying I disagree with the general proposition that firms are going to use this as an excuse to save money. But I think it's definitely an overgeneralization to say it's the only factor and "no one" is deferring for reasons other than saving money.

[QContinuum]

So you're saying that Wachtell and firms that follow and defer to Oct/Nov are doing so because of the bar exam? Seems like you just said that everyone is deferring to solely save money.

I'm not saying I disagree with the general proposition that firms are going to use this as an excuse to save money. But I think it's definitely an overgeneralization to say it's the only factor and "no one" is deferring for reasons other than saving money.

Look, I think Elston's language may have been a bit imprecise, but their headline conclusion is correct:

No one is deferring because it is hard to onboard someone remotely.

I think that remains true. Firms know they can mail laptops and monitors and phones out to incoming associates' homes, they know they can conduct Orientation trainings remotely via videoconference. If they really wanted to start these incoming associates asap, they'd follow Wachtell's example and defer by the minimum amount of time needed to ensure Orientation doesn't conflict with the September bar exam. In other words, they'd start associates in October. Firms aren't dumb enough to seriously think it's impossible to onboard incoming first-years remotely. At worst, if they believe remote onboarding requires more handholding than in-person onboarding (which may, in fact, be true), they'd start incoming first-years in multiple waves over October, November and December.

The only real reason to push back start dates to January 2021 is to save money.

[wishywashy]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

[texaslawl]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Not disagreeing with you as to the possibility of full year deferrals—I've been kinda bracing myself for it—but what the hell would we all do if we all got deferred for a year? I guess they would up the salary advances but...

accidental anon by user is texaslawl

[Anonymous User]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Yeah, it's interesting how people jumped right on Cadwalader for this move. That seems to be a common trend for Cadwalader- which distracts from the conversation. But I think we're all sort of hoping that other firms won't follow in their footsteps but I think we need to face the reality that 1) most firms are going to defer to january and 2) it's looking like salary advances will be the move (which I think you make a good point here- it might mean our jobs are more secure- at least in their minds)

[Anonymous User]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Yeah, it's interesting how people jumped right on Cadwalader for this move. That seems to be a common trend for Cadwalader- which distracts from the conversation. But I think we're all sort of hoping that other firms won't follow in their footsteps but I think we need to face the reality that 1) most firms are going to defer to january and 2) it's looking like salary advances will be the move (which I think you make a good point here- it might mean our jobs are more secure- at least in their minds)

Are firms that are giving the fall advance doing it in lieu of the bar advance?

[Anonymous User]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Yeah, it's interesting how people jumped right on Cadwalader for this move. That seems to be a common trend for Cadwalader- which distracts from the conversation. But I think we're all sort of hoping that other firms won't follow in their footsteps but I think we need to face the reality that 1) most firms are going to defer to january and 2) it's looking like salary advances will be the move (which I think you make a good point here- it might mean our jobs are more secure- at least in their minds)

Are firms that are giving the fall advance doing it in lieu of the bar advance?

From what I understand, the salary advances are in addition to what firms would normally provide (such as bar stipends/advances). Most of the new salary advances (or maybe all) won't even be paid out until October.

[Anonymous User]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Not disagreeing with you as to the possibility of full year deferrals—I've been kinda bracing myself for it—but what the hell would we all do if we all got deferred for a year? I guess they would up the salary advances but...

accidental anon by user is texaslawl

i'm so terrified of this happening and losing a year of my life waiting for a job to start.. but i'm optimistic deferral might only be until next spring since a deferral to august would make the classes of 2020 and 2021 start at the same time which seems unworkable?

[lawdude31]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Not disagreeing with you as to the possibility of full year deferrals—I've been kinda bracing myself for it—but what the hell would we all do if we all got deferred for a year? I guess they would up the salary advances but...

accidental anon by user is texaslawl

i'm so terrified of this happening and losing a year of my life waiting for a job to start.. but i'm optimistic deferral might only be until next spring since a deferral to august would make the classes of 2020 and 2021 start at the same time which seems unworkable?

During the last crisis this led to the following year's incoming class to be deferred as well.

[blkhk]

During the last crisis though didn't most firms give out stipends instead of advances, and much more significant stipends at that? It seems that with the exception of Hogan firms are expecting incoming first years to be living off of 5 to 7.5k for 4 months, which in NY gets you squat.

[jm2819]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Yeah, it's interesting how people jumped right on Cadwalader for this move. That seems to be a common trend for Cadwalader- which distracts from the conversation. But I think we're all sort of hoping that other firms won't follow in their footsteps but I think we need to face the reality that 1) most firms are going to defer to january and 2) it's looking like salary advances will be the move (which I think you make a good point here- it might mean our jobs are more secure- at least in their minds)

Are firms that are giving the fall advance doing it in lieu of the bar advance?

From what I understand, the salary advances are in addition to what firms would normally provide (such as bar stipends/advances). Most of the new salary advances (or maybe all) won't even be paid out until October.

I was wondering what makes you think that maybe all of the advances wouldn't be paid until October? In a normal year, are those advances/stipends paid in the fall?

[Anonymous User]

from reddit tracker - Dla Piper to Jan 2021, additional $7500 salary advance.

I am guessing that the salary advances are more common here because (1) firms want to get paid back but also (2) it implies you will be working at the firm (assurances of a job by implication).

Jan 2021 seems the official date for can kicking. Very much seems to assume we don't all get thrown back into lockdown in the fall as the virus explodes again AND that sept/oct bars go forward (if only as virtual/online exams thanks to CA forcing NCBE's hand). Also gives firms time to check collection % and change that Jan to an Aug if needed.

My guess is we start seeing full year deferrals soon but if my guesses were any good I'd be a millionaire from lottery tickets and the stock market (to the extent you see a difference between those two).

Yeah, it's interesting how people jumped right on Cadwalader for this move. That seems to be a common trend for Cadwalader- which distracts from the conversation. But I think we're all sort of hoping that other firms won't follow in their footsteps but I think we need to face the reality that 1) most firms are going to defer to january and 2) it's looking like salary advances will be the move (which I think you make a good point here- it might mean our jobs are more secure- at least in their minds)

Are firms that are giving the fall advance doing it in lieu of the bar advance?

From what I understand, the salary advances are in addition to what firms would normally provide (such as bar stipends/advances). Most of the new salary advances (or maybe all) won't even be paid out until October.

I was wondering what makes you think that maybe all of the advances wouldn't be paid until October? In a normal year, are those advances/stipends paid in the fall?

Sorry to clarify firms are paying their normal advances/stipends at their normal time (right around now actually). Firms which are providing an additional advance because of the deferral aren’t paying those out until October. So it’s more like staggered payouts

[wishywashy]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

[LHand1993]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

I don't really understand with this actually does. Couldn't we always practice with attorney supervision? Isn't any work we're going to be doing for the first few years supervised? Don't really see what this changes, unless I'm missing something.

[mtf612]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

I don't really understand with this actually does. Couldn't we always practice with attorney supervision? Isn't any work we're going to be doing for the first few years supervised? Don't really see what this changes, unless I'm missing something.

Seems to me this gives firms an excuse to push onboarding to March. Why would a firm bleeding money in this recession take any of us on in January for us to immediately leave for six+ weeks to prepare for the February exam? For firms that haven't pushed to January already, maybe we are lucky and get to start in the fall, but then we have to leave for a few weeks (maybe with a stipend/advance) to prepare for February? As someone with a NYC position, living in a non-UBE state, I am terrified that NY's solution is basically going to shave off six months of professional development/income.

[basketofbread]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

I don't really understand with this actually does. Couldn't we always practice with attorney supervision? Isn't any work we're going to be doing for the first few years supervised? Don't really see what this changes, unless I'm missing something.

Seems to me this gives firms an excuse to push onboarding to March. Why would a firm bleeding money in this recession take any of us on in January for us to immediately leave for six+ weeks to prepare for the February exam? For firms that haven't pushed to January already, maybe we are lucky and get to start in the fall, but then we have to leave for a few weeks (maybe with a stipend/advance) to prepare for February? As someone with a NYC position, living in a non-UBE state, I am terrified that NY's solution is basically going to shave off six months of professional development/income.

We're currently operating under (assumption? hope?) that many of us will be able to take the NY bar in September.

[wishywashy]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

I don't really understand with this actually does. Couldn't we always practice with attorney supervision? Isn't any work we're going to be doing for the first few years supervised? Don't really see what this changes, unless I'm missing something.

Seems to me this gives firms an excuse to push onboarding to March. Why would a firm bleeding money in this recession take any of us on in January for us to immediately leave for six+ weeks to prepare for the February exam? For firms that haven't pushed to January already, maybe we are lucky and get to start in the fall, but then we have to leave for a few weeks (maybe with a stipend/advance) to prepare for February? As someone with a NYC position, living in a non-UBE state, I am terrified that NY's solution is basically going to shave off six months of professional development/income.

My guess is this creates clarity for firms to do one of two things: (1) if they need people they can bring folks on as normal and make arrangements to study for the bar (look past big law to small and medium firms, legal aid, etc. where this might be helpful although not perfect); (2) they don't need people but they do need to save money yet still save face (i.e. not rescind a whole year of folks) so the firms have more cover to defer longer, including 1 year out, without having to worry about endless issues down the road with forms and NYLE and affidavits or making sure the bar exam is done by Sept and that none of their people lost the bar-exam-slot lottery, etc. etc.

So I think it creates clarity for firms and by extension for graduating classes. It may not be clarity we like but it greatly increases (for NYC centric firms or offices) the odds of us getting some certainty around start dates and our own cash flow versus endless silence and wait-and-see type emails.

Also, I at least feel less pressure around the Sept bar slot lottery that even if I win maybe I am risking death for the chance at an exam. Maybe now I am okay with waiting to Feb or even next July with some apps out for a seat in other UBE states.

Good or bad is going to be very situational. We shall see what the next round of emails looks like from those in the vault that have yet to speak, especially the NYC centric firms.

[mtf612]

For those taking the bar for the first time in NY:

NY Ct. App. did a practice order arrangement for first time bar takers that will cover us until we can sit for the bar as long as we do so by the end of 2021. See NY Ct. App.'s website for more details.

This should give firms in NY the clarity they need to move forward subject to financial realities (or financial fears). Hopefully the firms feel good about the practice order.

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/

edit: of course that means you have to study for the bar at some point and maybe then study again if that date goes poof but not a perfect world I guess?

I don't really understand with this actually does. Couldn't we always practice with attorney supervision? Isn't any work we're going to be doing for the first few years supervised? Don't really see what this changes, unless I'm missing something.

Seems to me this gives firms an excuse to push onboarding to March. Why would a firm bleeding money in this recession take any of us on in January for us to immediately leave for six+ weeks to prepare for the February exam? For firms that haven't pushed to January already, maybe we are lucky and get to start in the fall, but then we have to leave for a few weeks (maybe with a stipend/advance) to prepare for February? As someone with a NYC position, living in a non-UBE state, I am terrified that NY's solution is basically going to shave off six months of professional development/income.

We're currently operating under (assumption? hope?) that many of us will be able to take the NY bar in September.

That is my hope too, but I'm not in NY and did not go to a NY law school. For those of us who went to a t14 that is not Columbia, NYU, or Cornell, it would be helpful to know who is going to receive "prioritized" status to sit for the September bar.

[Anonymous User]

How are firms handling incoming first years who are currently law clerks and have already passed the bar? Are those people also being deferred despite having taken and passed the bar?

[LHand1993]

How are firms handling incoming first years who are currently law clerks and have already passed the bar? Are those people also being deferred despite having taken and passed the bar?

I don't see firms doing that--especially if their primary motivation is saving money. But the money part aside, I think it would be bad for first years' morale if they did that. I feel like it would be a weird situation where there are two tiers of first years--the ones who have been around a few months and the ones who are just getting there.