Is prestige of law firm really worth it? Forum

[greekdebtcrisis]

You don't sound too bright. But have fun being CEO of a F500 straight out of law school.

What a useless comment. At least say why I'm not bright and who the hell made any comment about f500 ceo out of law school? Fun fact: burger king's current cfo was hired at a younger age than many law graduates. PE rules I guess.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... y-children

What I am saying is that you can make a much higher salary out of law school yet people stick to biglaw even though they are interested in business/transactional work in general.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Damn bro, you're so much smarter than all these other prestige chasers. Don't listen to the hate.

Come on. In all seriousness it's not about being smarter or stupider. It's honestly about fleshing out the prestige factor. Why pursue transactional biglaw if you have altnerative options in non-legal and which you'll probabilistically pursue after several years in biglaw?

Has anyone actually said people who have alternative options should do biglaw? Besides Lat being satirical?

[greekdebtcrisis]

Damn bro, you're so much smarter than all these other prestige chasers. Don't listen to the hate.

Come on. In all seriousness it's not about being smarter or stupider. It's honestly about fleshing out the prestige factor. Why pursue transactional biglaw if you have altnerative options in non-legal and which you'll probabilistically pursue after several years in biglaw?

Has anyone actually said people who have alternative options should do biglaw? Besides Lat being satirical?

That's what many associates have said. That's what implicitly people do when they don't try to pursue any option when they get biglaw after 2L summer.

Also my favorite is when you ask first year associates what the difference is between them and contract attorneys as they're doing a similar job. The best response I got was that "because we're smarter." It sounds like the same response to people who make the claim that it is biglaw or bust because you know "prestige."

Also it sounds like you aren't disagreeing with me. But haven't you heard of this nebulous reasoning about pursuing biglaw for the sake of prestige?

[BigZuck]

I'm struggling to understand whether the OP is arguing with the voices in his head or against, like, actual things actual people have said.

[Avian]

Your question is based on a number of what I believe are shaky premises. You appear to be making the assumption that people are choosing to go to go into biglaw as opposed to in-house because they want the prestige. You also seem to be assuming that many people have the option to go directly in-house in the first place.

I doubt you're going to find many people who know they want to do transactional work and want to end up in-house that are not going to pick that if it's available, especially if it pays more right off the bat.

The reality of the situation and why I think most people end up in biglaw, at least to start, is due to a variety of factors. What I think are probably the most important ones are that the jobs are comparatively very easy to get if you have the grades and also that they tend to get people into their hiring process much earlier.

On the first point, there are literally hundreds of biglaw jobs available and the only real criteria is that you were smart enough to get good grades, you're willing to work hard, and you seem like someone that an interviewer could see themselves working with. This despite the fact that none of these people have any experience actually practicing law. Moreover, the firms actually show up at your law school and start handing out summer offers which will probably turn into job offers before you've even started your second year. Compare this to many companies who for the most part do not come to your school, won't consider you until you're in your third year, and may not not willing to hire straight out of law school in the first place.

You say people are implicitly choosing biglaw over other better options when they don't pursue anything after 2L summer when they have an offer. This is generally not true because most people do not have those better options at the time they decide not to keep applying around. If I don't start applying for jobs when I already have one, it doesn't necessarily mean I'm choosing my current job over the others because of prestige or some other reason. It probably means that I don't see the value in spending time applying for the small number of better positions which I probably won't get anyway.

Now you say that many associates have told you this. Even if they did say that, which would be surprising to me if you presented the question like you are here (someone who wants to be in-house anyway and better pay), it's likely that they're just saying that because they want self-validation for where they ended up. Most associates were not sitting on in-house offers like you and so never actually had to make that choice. I think if most people who wanted to go in-house were in the situation you've described, it would be an easy call.

As for why Lat and ATL rank biglaw highly on their methodology for school rankings, it's because those are the best outcomes for the vast majority of people and what people generally find relevant in picking a school. Most people don't care about in-house placement rates because there are so few positions it's not a very useful stat.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Damn bro, you're so much smarter than all these other prestige chasers. Don't listen to the hate.

Come on. In all seriousness it's not about being smarter or stupider. It's honestly about fleshing out the prestige factor. Why pursue transactional biglaw if you have altnerative options in non-legal and which you'll probabilistically pursue after several years in biglaw?

Has anyone actually said people who have alternative options should do biglaw? Besides Lat being satirical?

That's what many associates have said. That's what implicitly people do when they don't try to pursue any option when they get biglaw after 2L summer.

Also my favorite is when you ask first year associates what the difference is between them and contract attorneys as they're doing a similar job. The best response I got was that "because we're smarter." It sounds like the same response to people who make the claim that it is biglaw or bust because you know "prestige."

Also it sounds like you aren't disagreeing with me. But haven't you heard of this nebulous reasoning about pursuing biglaw for the sake of prestige?

I'm very unprestigious, so no, I haven't really seen people say that. When I read about it here, people generally suggest going to biglaw 1) for the money, whether to pay off debt or not; 2) for the kind of work those firms offer, and/or 3) to get the necessary years of experience required to get/do the job they really want (usually in-house/government). I'm sure prestige plays some role, but most people here would laugh at going to biglaw *only* for prestige if you don't need to for other reasons.

And I don't think not pursuing other jobs after getting something through OCI is motivated as much by prestige as you think. I think it's mostly motivated by inertia (it's easiest) and/or fear (why risk a secure job??) or lack of confidence (why would other employers hire me?) or ignorance (what other jobs can law students get??). I don't think most law students feel like they have lots of non-legal options, so the way you stated that seemed kind of straw-man-ish.

I also don't get how what associates say about contract attorneys fits here. Of course it's more prestigious in biglaw to be an associate rather than a contract attorney, because higher pay/title/better security/benefits are always more prestigious than less, but that doesn't say much about doing biglaw for the prestige compared to other non-legal jobs.

It's true that most lawyers are prestige whores, sure. But if your options are in fact so much better, who cares?

[rpupkin]

Help me wrap my head around this

No.

[2014]

OP you are truly insufferable, this thread is obnoxious

[greekdebtcrisis]

Damn bro, you're so much smarter than all these other prestige chasers. Don't listen to the hate.

Come on. In all seriousness it's not about being smarter or stupider. It's honestly about fleshing out the prestige factor. Why pursue transactional biglaw if you have altnerative options in non-legal and which you'll probabilistically pursue after several years in biglaw?

Has anyone actually said people who have alternative options should do biglaw? Besides Lat being satirical?

That's what many associates have said. That's what implicitly people do when they don't try to pursue any option when they get biglaw after 2L summer.

Also my favorite is when you ask first year associates what the difference is between them and contract attorneys as they're doing a similar job. The best response I got was that "because we're smarter." It sounds like the same response to people who make the claim that it is biglaw or bust because you know "prestige."

Also it sounds like you aren't disagreeing with me. But haven't you heard of this nebulous reasoning about pursuing biglaw for the sake of prestige?

I'm very unprestigious, so no, I haven't really seen people say that. When I read about it here, people generally suggest going to biglaw 1) for the money, whether to pay off debt or not; 2) for the kind of work those firms offer, and/or 3) to get the necessary years of experience required to get/do the job they really want (usually in-house/government). I'm sure prestige plays some role, but most people here would laugh at going to biglaw *only* for prestige if you don't need to for other reasons.

And I don't think not pursuing other jobs after getting something through OCI is motivated as much by prestige as you think. I think it's mostly motivated by inertia (it's easiest) and/or fear (why risk a secure job??) or lack of confidence (why would other employers hire me?) or ignorance (what other jobs can law students get??). I don't think most law students feel like they have lots of non-legal options, so the way you stated that seemed kind of straw-man-ish.

I also don't get how what associates say about contract attorneys fits here. Of course it's more prestigious in biglaw to be an associate rather than a contract attorney, because higher pay/title/better security/benefits are always more prestigious than less, but that doesn't say much about doing biglaw for the prestige compared to other non-legal jobs.

It's true that most lawyers are prestige whores, sure. But if your options are in fact so much better, who cares?

Thanks for the response. I disagree with the straw man point. Just because they feel they don't have options, doesn't mean they don't. Perhaps I'm misreading. Actually once you get biglaw, leveraging it isn't that tough. It gives employers a sense of trust that you somehow are doing things right.

The contract atty point was to show the bizarre justifications used by associates. Arguing that a contract attorney can't do a first year associate's work is just gibberish, offensive, and elitist. But the essence of what these associates claim and the analogy I aimed to draw was that whatever the justification it is just meaningless to make such lofty claims much like when someone tries to justify biglaw as prestigious. They seem to me to be simply untrue, and so whenever someone has a better option, they should logically go for that option. And yet, the prestige factor seems to keep many at bay even though they can and should leverage their biglaw offer into something that is at least economically better.

[rpupkin]

The contract atty point was to show the bizarre justifications used by associates. Arguing that a contract attorney can't do a first year associate's work is just gibberish, offensive, and elitist. But the essence of what these associates claim and the analogy I aimed to draw was that whatever the justification it is just meaningless to make such lofty claims much like when someone tries to justify biglaw as prestigious. They seem to me to be simply untrue, and so whenever someone has a better option, they should logically go for that option. And yet, the prestige factor seems to keep many at bay even though they can and should leverage their biglaw offer into something that is at least economically better.

But when one considers, in the abstract, the essence of prestige from a wayward perspective, the pretensions of the elitists become all the more confounding. How does the prototypical associate temper the upswell of superiority from the depths of the institutional well from which he must draw? Perhaps it is those depths, and not the associate, who should draw our ire.

[mvp99]

OP you are truly insufferable, this thread is obnoxious

+1

[NorCalLaw]

OP you are truly insufferable, this thread is obnoxious

Yeah, it's one of the worst humblebrags I've seen.

"Guys, I rejected this job at a top law firm because I had unique but impossible to describe options that were clearly superior. Can you folks who mostly work the type of job I rejected piece together some sort of reason why I'm not better than you? Didn't think so."

[ManoftheHour]

OP you are truly insufferable, this thread is obnoxious

Yeah, it's one of the worst humblebrags I've seen.

"Guys, I rejected this job at a top law firm because I had unique but impossible to describe options that were clearly superior. Can you folks who mostly work the type of job I rejected piece together some sort of reason why I'm not better than you? Didn't think so."

[BiglawAssociate]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

[BigZuck]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

[greekdebtcrisis]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Yes you're right. Do you enjoy biglaw?

[rpupkin]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

Does this ever actually work?

[BiglawAssociate]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Yes you're right. Do you enjoy biglaw?

It's the best job ever. You know why? Because of all dat prestige. That's what keeps me going. I'm sooo fucking prestigious. I'm one out of only 100,000 biglawyers in the world. Top 1% in prestige. I pop my collar everyday and get all hot and sweaty thinking about how amazing and prestigious I am. FUCK YES - I MADE IT. Only took 3 years of school, 500k in loans, and 12+ hours of working everyday. But don't worry - I'll pay off these shitty loans in only 10 years. PRESTIGEEEEEEEEEEEE

[BigZuck]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

Does this ever actually work?

Not sure but I don't think so.

[Johann]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

Does this ever actually work?

hell no. why would it work? like the mods would silence actual lawyers who do this shit day in and day out because some whiny 0Ls think they know something. people reading the forum mostly look to our words and just skim past law students/unknowledgeable peoples words.

[greekdebtcrisis]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Yes you're right. Do you enjoy biglaw?

It's the best job ever. You know why? Because of all dat prestige. That's what keeps me going. I'm sooo fucking prestigious. I'm one out of only 100,000 biglawyers in the world. Top 1% in prestige. I pop my collar everyday and get all hot and sweaty thinking about how amazing and prestigious I am. FUCK YES - I MADE IT. Only took 3 years of school, 500k in loans, and 12+ hours of working everyday. But don't worry - I'll pay off these shitty loans in only 10 years. PRESTIGEEEEEEEEEEEE

500k in loans? Where did you go wrong? Did you make a deal with a loan shark?

I agree though, all about that prestige.

[greekdebtcrisis]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

Does this ever actually work?

hell no. why would it work? like the mods would silence actual lawyers who do this shit day in and day out because some whiny 0Ls think they know something. people reading the forum mostly look to our words and just skim past law students/unknowledgeable peoples words.

Oh boy. I hope you don't think I'm a 0L! But mods shouldn't ban this. I hope people don't do biglaw after law and actually get more satisfying jobs after law school.

There must be so many people skimming these posts who are 1st or 2nd year associates and are hating life right now. I actually bet some 3rd years who did a dist and app clerkships hate their lives as biglaw is billing clients at 3rd year rates for doc review lol.

There should be a thread for "fuck biglaw". I haven't seen a single post that justifies working as a transactional associate (unless you're wachtell but you can still beat that bonus + salary straight out of law school if you do things right).

Should this be on jd underground?

[chuckbass]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Moderators: please!

Ugh why is he back with a vengeance all of the sudden

[BigZuck]

Johann, BiglawAss, and greekdebt just might be too much mental illness for one thread to handle

This thread is reaching a critical mass or singularity or something

[BiglawAssociate]

TL; DR

Also, nobody gives a shit about your law firm's "prestige". You're probably a broke motherfucker, so you don't have any prestige anyway.

Yes you're right. Do you enjoy biglaw?

It's the best job ever. You know why? Because of all dat prestige. That's what keeps me going. I'm sooo fucking prestigious. I'm one out of only 100,000 biglawyers in the world. Top 1% in prestige. I pop my collar everyday and get all hot and sweaty thinking about how amazing and prestigious I am. FUCK YES - I MADE IT. Only took 3 years of school, 500k in loans, and 12+ hours of working everyday. But don't worry - I'll pay off these shitty loans in only 10 years. PRESTIGEEEEEEEEEEEE

500k in loans? Where did you go wrong? Did you make a deal with a loan shark?

I agree though, all about that prestige.

It's sarcasm. I am not a moron and never took out that many loans. I also already paid off my loans anyway, and because I married into money, I am financially way better off than like 99% of biglaw associates.

I'm saying most people are broke as shit stupid 0Ls on this forum - and they keep offering terrible advice about EVERYTHING. It's just so fucking annoying, I wish they would only let lawyers post here.