You just started at your firm-Happy with your choice so far? Forum

[Agent]

Mind shooting me a PM?

I am at a V50 in Cal. Also two months in, patent litigation. I love my job. It's the most exciting work experience I have so far in my life. Not that my workload is light: I billed 8-10 hours each day during the past two months. I love reading the clients' secret technical documents and reverse-engineering products on the market and writing memos mixed with law and tech.

My officemates circulate fun emails all the time- food, random jokes, etc. Everyone is fun.

Biglaw is not all that miserable, except for the extremely long hours.

[Anonymous User]

im at a v5 in nyc. i have been here for over 2 months. i would tell my old self to listen to everyone who told me not to go to law school and that law sucks. it really does. really b/c it is so much stressful and frustrating than it has to be.

lawyers make awful business people and awful managers. they don't know how to manage people. they don't know how to efficiently run a deal. as the junior your job is to pick up the pieces of shit that fall from the top. you are always kept in the dark. i have done the same exact assignment twice, because after I turned it in, the partner changed her mind on the formatting she wants. there have been assignments that have sat on partners desks for three days before they give it to me, and then tell me they need by morning. at first you think hey, these people must be busy, they're partners. but then you realize that they all stroll in around 10 oclock. for some reason lawyers are incapable of doing any work before 10am. there are midlevels who like to hang out all day and only get down to business at 5pm. as the junior you must accommodate their schedule. the whole system is so plagued with inefficiency it's ridiculous.

i think people who've had real office jobs before in corporate america will be the most frustrated. ive spoken to other associates and they don't seem as frustrated as i am. i think because they think this is how normal organizations are run.

V15 NYC. I've been here about 2 months. The above is credited, but I love my job. The difference is I worked in a non-law job. To me this kind of work isn't stressful or frustrating because my old job was just as fucked up and paid me less. So I'm happier here.

I love my firm, but I think a lot depends on perspective. The associates I know who are happiest worked between college and law school. Or they came from families of lawyers. Don't be an idealist coming in. If you are, you'll be disappointed.

[twinkletoes16]

im at a v5 in nyc. i have been here for over 2 months. i would tell my old self to listen to everyone who told me not to go to law school and that law sucks. it really does. really b/c it is so much stressful and frustrating than it has to be.

lawyers make awful business people and awful managers. they don't know how to manage people. they don't know how to efficiently run a deal. as the junior your job is to pick up the pieces of shit that fall from the top. you are always kept in the dark. i have done the same exact assignment twice, because after I turned it in, the partner changed her mind on the formatting she wants. there have been assignments that have sat on partners desks for three days before they give it to me, and then tell me they need by morning. at first you think hey, these people must be busy, they're partners. but then you realize that they all stroll in around 10 oclock. for some reason lawyers are incapable of doing any work before 10am. there are midlevels who like to hang out all day and only get down to business at 5pm. as the junior you must accommodate their schedule. the whole system is so plagued with inefficiency it's ridiculous.

i think people who've had real office jobs before in corporate america will be the most frustrated. ive spoken to other associates and they don't seem as frustrated as i am. i think because they think this is how normal organizations are run.

V15 NYC. I've been here about 2 months. The above is credited, but I love my job. The difference is I worked in a non-law job. To me this kind of work isn't stressful or frustrating because my old job was just as fucked up and paid me less. So I'm happier here.

I love my firm, but I think a lot depends on perspective. The associates I know who are happiest worked between college and law school. Or they came from families of lawyers. Don't be an idealist coming in. If you are, you'll be disappointed.

0L here so lol why am I even in this post, but above is true so so much. I've been out in the real world and when you're slaving away 60 hours a week in a stressful job for less than 15,000 a year, barely living paycheck to paycheck, I think working in biglaw, as shitty as it can be, would be a lot more bearable with all the extra $$$

[somewhatwayward]

im at a v5 in nyc. i have been here for over 2 months. i would tell my old self to listen to everyone who told me not to go to law school and that law sucks. it really does. really b/c it is so much stressful and frustrating than it has to be.

lawyers make awful business people and awful managers. they don't know how to manage people. they don't know how to efficiently run a deal. as the junior your job is to pick up the pieces of shit that fall from the top. you are always kept in the dark. i have done the same exact assignment twice, because after I turned it in, the partner changed her mind on the formatting she wants. there have been assignments that have sat on partners desks for three days before they give it to me, and then tell me they need by morning. at first you think hey, these people must be busy, they're partners. but then you realize that they all stroll in around 10 oclock. for some reason lawyers are incapable of doing any work before 10am. there are midlevels who like to hang out all day and only get down to business at 5pm. as the junior you must accommodate their schedule. the whole system is so plagued with inefficiency it's ridiculous.

i think people who've had real office jobs before in corporate america will be the most frustrated. ive spoken to other associates and they don't seem as frustrated as i am. i think because they think this is how normal organizations are run.

Will you name the V5? You're anon...

[Anonymous User]

The major difference between working some non-law jobs (like engineering jobs) and working at biglaw is that you're always on the clock in biglaw. You can basically lie and pad your hours, like many people seem to do, but if you try to be honest about how many hours you're *actually* working, it's pretty fucking hard to get to 2000 hours in one year. I guess if you're single and have no hobbies, it wouldn't be so bad.

As an engineer, you don't have billable hours requirements and you're *actually* working maybe 20-25 hours per week. When you're not working, you're chilling in meetings, daydreaming, reading personal emails, etc. This is true in bigEngineering, but might not be true at startups (and lol, just lol @ people who have had to work at startups for shitty pay, shitty hours, and shitty work experience).

It's impossible to get shit done in biglaw, given the deadlines you're sometimes given, and continue pissing away 15-20 hours every week (which makes work a hell of a lot more bearable). As a result, I find myself exhausted at the end of every day whereas this wasn't the case as an engineer. This leads to lack of exercise, obesity, alcoholism, etc.

[Anonymous User]

The major difference between working some non-law jobs (like engineering jobs) and working at biglaw is that you're always on the clock in biglaw. You can basically lie and pad your hours, like many people seem to do, but if you try to be honest about how many hours you're *actually* working, it's pretty fucking hard to get to 2000 hours in one year. I guess if you're single and have no hobbies, it wouldn't be so bad.

As an engineer, you don't have billable hours requirements and you're *actually* working maybe 20-25 hours per week. When you're not working, you're chilling in meetings, daydreaming, reading personal emails, etc. This is true in bigEngineering, but might not be true at startups (and lol, just lol @ people who have had to work at startups for shitty pay, shitty hours, and shitty work experience).

It's impossible to get shit done in biglaw, given the deadlines you're sometimes given, and continue pissing away 15-20 hours every week (which makes work a hell of a lot more bearable). As a result, I find myself exhausted at the end of every day whereas this wasn't the case as an engineer. This leads to lack of exercise, obesity, alcoholism, etc.

v5 anon from above. very credited. i can confirm that padding happens like crazy. a lot of the people who bill 2600 hours are not very honest/efficient (take your pick which it is). ive worked side by side by lawyers who start billing and dont stop till they finished the matter. so they include all the breaks they took etc. i try not to be too anal and dont stop the clock just to take a piss, but i know people who leave the building for a cup of coffee and still keep the clock going. if you bill very honestly youll soon see how hard it is just to get to 2000.

[v20lawyer]

The major difference between working some non-law jobs (like engineering jobs) and working at biglaw is that you're always on the clock in biglaw. You can basically lie and pad your hours, like many people seem to do, but if you try to be honest about how many hours you're *actually* working, it's pretty fucking hard to get to 2000 hours in one year. I guess if you're single and have no hobbies, it wouldn't be so bad.

As an engineer, you don't have billable hours requirements and you're *actually* working maybe 20-25 hours per week. When you're not working, you're chilling in meetings, daydreaming, reading personal emails, etc. This is true in bigEngineering, but might not be true at startups (and lol, just lol @ people who have had to work at startups for shitty pay, shitty hours, and shitty work experience).

It's impossible to get shit done in biglaw, given the deadlines you're sometimes given, and continue pissing away 15-20 hours every week (which makes work a hell of a lot more bearable). As a result, I find myself exhausted at the end of every day whereas this wasn't the case as an engineer. This leads to lack of exercise, obesity, alcoholism, etc.

v5 anon from above. very credited. i can confirm that padding happens like crazy. a lot of the people who bill 2600 hours are not very honest/efficient (take your pick which it is). ive worked side by side by lawyers who start billing and dont stop till they finished the matter. so they include all the breaks they took etc. i try not to be too anal and dont stop the clock just to take a piss, but i know people who leave the building for a cup of coffee and still keep the clock going. if you bill very honestly youll soon see how hard it is just to get to 2000.

first year at a v20. Padding happens but can't say for sure to what extent. Semi-purposeful inefficiency (meaning they put no real effort into learning how to do things faster) seems much more common, although I think the worst offenders struggle when shit hits the fan and things actually need to be turned around quick. How hard it is to bill 2000 is all about what your work flow is like. If you generally have work to turn to every time you finish up an assignment, being on track to hit 2000 is easy. It's really only somewhere between 8-8.5 billable hours every weekday and when you're in the office from 9:30 - 7:30 everyday that isn't tough at all, provided you actually have 8 hours of work to do. If you're in a group like I am where you're basically guaranteed a few very late nights each month (4-5 am) and 15 billable hour days, plus probably a minimum of 15-20 hours over your weekends for the month, averaging over 8 for the number of weekdays in the month becomes pretty simple. If you're not getting the work, though, completely different story.

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

[Anonymous User]

v5 anon from above. very credited. i can confirm that padding happens like crazy. a lot of the people who bill 2600 hours are not very honest/efficient (take your pick which it is). ive worked side by side by lawyers who start billing and dont stop till they finished the matter. so they include all the breaks they took etc. i try not to be too anal and dont stop the clock just to take a piss, but i know people who leave the building for a cup of coffee and still keep the clock going. if you bill very honestly youll soon see how hard it is just to get to 2000.

How hard it is to bill 2000 is all about what your work flow is like.

This is a really good point. Some NY litigation departments right now are so slammed that virtually everyone is on track to bill 2400+ without padding - average for the first year class in November at my SO's firm was close to 300. There's so much backlog that there's basically no such thing as associates sitting around waiting for work.

Because corporate is more variable, I think it's harder to bill a set amount. You're much more at the mercy of a deal picking up or dying. But if you work in lit and your department is busy, it's very easy to bill 2000 (or much more) without really trying.

[itbdvorm]

FWIW, my impression re: grades is the following:

if you're trying to lateral from biglaw to another firm/something else in corporate / transactional, they'll ask what you've been doing. they can base quite a bit on where you are, why you say you're leaving, what your experience purportedly is, etc.

if you're trying to laterla from biglaw to another firm/something else in litigation, you may be in trouble because the above answers can easily be crap (depending on where you are / what opportunities you've had). so they ask for your grades...

[06102016]

..

[Anonymous User]

FWIW, my impression re: grades is the following:

if you're trying to lateral from biglaw to another firm/something else in corporate / transactional, they'll ask what you've been doing. they can base quite a bit on where you are, why you say you're leaving, what your experience purportedly is, etc.

if you're trying to laterla from biglaw to another firm/something else in litigation, you may be in trouble because the above answers can easily be crap (depending on where you are / what opportunities you've had). so they ask for your grades...

This is my impression as well. The problem is that litigation's business model is more of a Ponzi scheme in biglaw than corporate's. You need a shitton of associates to be able to handle massive amounts of document requests, so there is a natural tendency to want to throw juniors on this kind of work and, when juniors look around for work, this is often the most plentiful type that clients are willing to pay them to do. After four years, these associates are two expensive, however, for most clients to be willing to pay them to continue doing document review, and there is a giant class of new (read: cheap) associates starting every year that law firms and clients can throw on doc review. As a result people who could only find doc review work as juniors end up missing their hours because they have no experience doing depos or other things which fourth years are supposed to know how to do. Their classmates with better grades/connections with partners/LR got these substantive assignments at better firms earlier than the doc reviewers did. As a result, fourth years with mostly doc review experience get bad reviews for missing hours and eventually get pushed out. When they get pushed out, they don't have any substantive work to point to to get them a mid-level or senior associate position and they sure as hell don't have a book of business. Therefore, they can't find a job at another biglaw firm (unless they have an otherwise stellar resume with top grades, a clerkship, top school, etc.). Many lit associates end up in smaller firms (working for much, much less) or leaving law altogether.

In summary, litigation is a place where top law students, who go to the top firms, get the best, most substantive work right out of the gate and everyone else gets screwed (in the long term) because no one's going to give you an opportunity to handle your first depo when your classmate on LR has already done three and you both get paid the same amount.

[anon168]

So would it be too much of a generalization to say that transactional lawyers have an easier time of it (assuming they have a good resume otherwise) since they'll have experience in a niche area and can go to work for a client, while grades tend to matter more if you're a litigator with little substantive experience trying to lateral? Particularly wondering about corporate exit options in NYC. I thought that the strength of the practice area at your firm/V Rank meant more.

- 12:13.

That's too glib.

Just anecdotal, but when Jamie Dixon was running JPM, they absolutely cared about grades for in-house lateral candidates. So, you can't just say that grades don't matter for transactional lawyers, and they do for litigators.

As I've said elsewhere on this site, I think everyone in their right minds can agree that grades do matter. People will just disagree about how much they matter.

So if we can all agree that grades do matter, then why not do everything in your power to maximize this one variable in the lateral hiring process that you do have control over. Because, let's face it, just about everything else in the lateral market -- from work experience, to market forces and demand, to connections -- are a bit out of your direct control.

So, yes, it may suck to have to still study as a 3L, but consider the downsides if you don't. Let's say you get an opportunity at your dream job -- whatever that maybe -- and the recruiter says you meet all the criteria to a "T" but your grades just don't cut it. Impossible, you say? Maybe, but are you willing to take that risk at your dream job simply because you can start drinking on Wednesday night, instead of Thursday?

It's up to you and it's your career, but if it were me, and there was absolutely no guarantee that my potential dream job did not hinge on my grades, I would do everything in my power to make sure that that one variable is taken out of the equation. But that's just me.

[v20lawyer]

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

My own is, unfortunately, unique enough I'd rather not mention it. You see a decent number of people who worked as paralegals for obviously less pay (not all of them worked similar hours but some do). I've met some former accountants who, based on their descriptions, sound like they worked similar hours for less pay. There really are a lot of examples, although I would say truly comparable hours for less pay is a lot less common than somewhat fewer for less pay.

[v20lawyer]

So would it be too much of a generalization to say that transactional lawyers have an easier time of it (assuming they have a good resume otherwise) since they'll have experience in a niche area and can go to work for a client, while grades tend to matter more if you're a litigator with little substantive experience trying to lateral? Particularly wondering about corporate exit options in NYC. I thought that the strength of the practice area at your firm/V Rank meant more.

- 12:13.

That's too glib.

Just anecdotal, but when Jamie Dixon was running JPM, they absolutely cared about grades for in-house lateral candidates. So, you can't just say that grades don't matter for transactional lawyers, and they do for litigators.

As I've said elsewhere on this site, I think everyone in their right minds can agree that grades do matter. People will just disagree about how much they matter.

So if we can all agree that grades do matter, then why not do everything in your power to maximize this one variable in the lateral hiring process that you do have control over. Because, let's face it, just about everything else in the lateral market -- from work experience, to market forces and demand, to connections -- are a bit out of your direct control.

So, yes, it may suck to have to still study as a 3L, but consider the downsides if you don't. Let's say you get an opportunity at your dream job -- whatever that maybe -- and the recruiter says you meet all the criteria to a "T" but your grades just don't cut it. Impossible, you say? Maybe, but are you willing to take that risk at your dream job simply because you can start drinking on Wednesday night, instead of Thursday?

It's up to you and it's your career, but if it were me, and there was absolutely no guarantee that my potential dream job did not hinge on my grades, I would do everything in my power to make sure that that one variable is taken out of the equation. But that's just me.

As a first year I obviously can't get into a detailed discussion of this because I (a) haven't been on the hiring end of people leaving biglaw/lateraling to another firm, and (b) haven't tried doing either myself yet.

What I can say is that based on what I've seen and heard so far I'm I think that whatever impact my grades will have a few years down the road will be so marginal I don't really care. I almost 0 effort into 2L and 3L year, and so far, I'm still glad I did that. Obviously my impression is heavily influenced by the particular group I'm in and the exit options I've seen from this group.

[imchuckbass58]

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

Management consulting, certain types of accounting jobs, banking analysts (in 2007, maybe you made as much as biglaw, but certainly not true now).

[Anonymous User]

Are we talking top 10% v. top 25% type grade differences or is that negligible? Is it more the top 1/3 people v. those who fall below median?

[thesealocust]

So if we can all agree that grades do matter,

We don't.

They irrefutably do for most people getting most entry level legal jobs. After that, there is a large amount of convincing evidence that they won't matter at all.

Might be different in some regions, for some jobs, etc. There are undoubtedly exceptions and it's not a well discussed market so it's hard to say with any certainty, but there's plenty of reason to suspect that grades won't mean squat for a large portion of the population when it comes to lateral hiring.

[IAFG]

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

Management consulting, certain types of accounting jobs, banking analysts (in 2007, maybe you made as much as biglaw, but certainly not true now).

Really though, after you make that fat student loan payment, your take-home is pretty shitty, and it's pretty hard to get biglaw without the expensive degree.

[hopin10]

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

Management consulting, certain types of accounting jobs, banking analysts (in 2007, maybe you made as much as biglaw, but certainly not true now).

Just... no. First-year starting salary with bonus at an MBB is only slightly less than first-year biglaw associate salary. And the hours are better.

[dood]

i fucking hate my life dogg

[imchuckbass58]

overall, I'd say how people handle it depends a lot on their life experience coming in. If you've worked similar hours for less pay, know how to interact with other people and can handle the overflow of other people's stress, this job isn't bad at all. If you've never really worked a real job before then you're probably in for a rough transition.

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

Management consulting, certain types of accounting jobs, banking analysts (in 2007, maybe you made as much as biglaw, but certainly not true now).

Just... no. First-year starting salary with bonus at an MBB is only slightly less than first-year biglaw associate salary. And the hours are better.

Not if you're an analyst at MBB right out of undergrad. The comment referenced people who have worked similar jobs for less pay before law school. If you managed to get a post-MBA management consulting job before law school, I'd be very impressed (and question why you're going to law school). First year analyst salaries are ~$70k plus a relatively small bonus ($5-10k).

And as far as the hours being better - sure, they're probably more regular (i.e., fewer all-nighters / weekends), but in terms of hours per week it's about the same (source: I worked in management consulting before law school - I assume you're just repeating what you've heard elsewhere on TLS).

If you're going to be snarky, you should know what you're talking about.

[Old Gregg]

I've seen way too many people lateral into V5s and V10s with grades at median or below to believe that grades matter all that much.

[imchuckbass58]

I've seen way too many people lateral into V5s and V10s with grades at median or below to believe that grades matter all that much.

I feel like it's probably very firm, market, and skill dependent. If you have a specialty that's suddenly in demand (e.g., derivatives / ABS five years ago) I bet they wouldn't care even if your grades were actively bad, but if you're just trying to lateral for a general lit position where there are dozens of people who can do the job, they might care more. Similarly I wouldn't be surprised if places like DC or traditionally grade-snobbish firms like Wachtell or S&C cared more about grades than say Skadden or Weil.

[hopin10]

What's an example of comparable hours for less pay? Give a few examples?

Management consulting, certain types of accounting jobs, banking analysts (in 2007, maybe you made as much as biglaw, but certainly not true now).

Just... no. First-year starting salary with bonus at an MBB is only slightly less than first-year biglaw associate salary. And the hours are better.

Not if you're an analyst at MBB right out of undergrad. The comment referenced people who have worked similar jobs for less pay before law school. If you managed to get a post-MBA management consulting job before law school, I'd be very impressed (and question why you're going to law school). First year analyst salaries are ~$70k plus a relatively small bonus ($5-10k).

And as far as the hours being better - sure, they're probably more regular (i.e., fewer all-nighters / weekends), but in terms of hours per week it's about the same (source: I worked in management consulting before law school - I assume you're just repeating what you've heard elsewhere on TLS).

If you're going to be snarky, you should know what you're talking about.

Source: I worked at an MBB before law school. Sorry about the pre versus post LS confusion for pay. Still pretty sure consulting hours and lifestyle is better than big law, at least for the big three. Hours aren't good, but you can have a life. You'll likely travel more than biglaw, that's true.

See this thread for some more perspectives on the comparison: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2#p6105252

[dood]

my life consists LITERALLY of:

1. wake-up
2. work for 12 hours
3. come home too tired to do ANYTHING
4. eat shitty fast food (due to #3)
5. watch sportscenter (due to #3)

same thing with my roommate and another good friend in big law - all three of us constantly reminisce about when we went to happy hours, had time for girls, or even just simple shit like working out, cooking a real meal, etc.

honestly, id even sacrifice all that shit for the $$ if i could just get to keep working out and cooking a real meal. maybe it gets better, but i dont even have time/energy for that simple shit and thus that is why i am miserable.