Why EXACTLY is NYC training considered top notch? Forum

[nerd1]

Because when people say the word "training" at a law firm, they mean you will deal with a huge volume of work, which NYC has.

Exactly this. It has nothing to do with how bright the people are. There is no reason to think that folks in London and Hong Kong offices are not as bright as the folks in New York. I myself worked for over 3 years in NYC biglaw and lateraled to an Asian office. I just had a more consistent deal flow with deals greater in volume and complexity than the ones I'm working on in Asia.

[nerd1]

because nowhere else will you be expected to routinely work ungodly hours, and nowhere else will you be subject to the abuse of such a high concentration of sociopaths

Haha this is so wrong regarding hours. The hours can be a lot worse in Asian offices. Because offices are much smaller, deals tend to always be understaffed, and often midlevels have to handle junior level work like simple diligence in addition to senior level work like marking up main transaction documents. But it's also true that hours can be more inconsistent in an Asian office as deal flow tends to be more patchy. So here when you are busy, you are getting crushed in back-to-back 300 hour months. But when you are not busy, you could be billing less than 50 in a month.

[Anonymous User]

bump, with the pandemic (hopefully) nearing its end, is the general sentiment/advice still NYC or bust??

[Sackboy]

bump, with the pandemic (hopefully) nearing its end, is the general sentiment/advice still NYC or bust??

What advice? If you want to live in NYC, go to a firm's NYC office. If not, don't. Training at most biglaw firms is absolute ass everywhere, especially in a remote environment, so you can go get your ass training anywhere. Anyone claiming NYC has the best training has only demonstrated that they've had surgery to remove some vertebrae to suck their own dick, not a factual reality.

[Anonymous User]

I can only comment on lit. NYC-or-bust simply isn't a concept that exists in lit. The best litigators aren't gunning for Cravath NY or DPW or something. They're doing COA clerkships and shooting for elite boutiques (think Kellogg, Barlit Beck, Munger, etc), going to top shops in DC, or going to top lit shops in their home market (which may or may not be a boutique, think Bondurant in Atlanta, Wilmer in Boston, Gibson in Dallas, Kirkland/Sidley in Chicago, Jones Day in non-Chicago Midwest, Susman in Houston etc).

Maybe things are different for M&A and corporate.

[The Lsat Airbender]

bump, with the pandemic (hopefully) nearing its end, is the general sentiment/advice still NYC or bust??

When was that ever the general sentiment? What does the pandemic have to do with it??

[Anonymous User]

To this day, there are more top attorneys in New York, there are more big deals flowing through New York, and there are more highly complex matters flowing through New York than any other market.

Can you get the same training anywhere else? Sure, particularly in San Francisco, Chicago, DC, and Dallas. And particularly in certain specialties, such as San Francisco for Tech and DC for anything political. But there are more opportunities for more attorneys to get that kind of training than anywhere else.

If you go to, say, Detroit, there are only a handful of firms that do major corporate restructuring, for example, whereas in New York there are dozens of firms that do so. A lateral coming from New York would be assumed to have worked on more, more diverse, and more complex, matters than a lateral coming from anywhere else, and can be assumed to have received better training.

Dallas?? You mean Houston.

I'm not OP, but I'd actually say Dallas lawyers get more of the type of training he's talking about (even if Houston has a bigger legal market).

The entire city of Houston revolves around O&G while Dallas has a much more diverse economy. Dallas lawyers also tend to work more with other offices (since there's only so much business that's generated within Dallas) so the ones at the big nationals do a ton of work with their NYC/SF/Boston offices. A typical corporate lawyer in Dallas will have worked on a much broader set of transactions and would be more versatile than a Houston lawyer whose entire career revolves around energy.

As someone practicing in Houston, this is a ridiculous and outdated take. Maybe some truth if you’re going to a local Texas firm, but not a big national one.

[Anonymous User]

because nowhere else will you be expected to routinely work ungodly hours, and nowhere else will you be subject to the abuse of such a high concentration of sociopaths

Haha this is so wrong regarding hours. The hours can be a lot worse in Asian offices. Because offices are much smaller, deals tend to always be understaffed, and often midlevels have to handle junior level work like simple diligence in addition to senior level work like marking up main transaction documents. But it's also true that hours can be more inconsistent in an Asian office as deal flow tends to be more patchy. So here when you are busy, you are getting crushed in back-to-back 300 hour months. But when you are not busy, you could be billing less than 50 in a month.

This is just a description of satellite offices nothing exclusive to Asian offices. FYI mid levels in New York and seniors in New York also do work below their class year routinely because of the volume.

[Anonymous User]

bump, with the pandemic (hopefully) nearing its end, is the general sentiment/advice still NYC or bust??

What advice? If you want to live in NYC, go to a firm's NYC office. If not, don't. Training at most biglaw firms is absolute ass everywhere, especially in a remote environment, so you can go get your ass training anywhere. Anyone claiming NYC has the best training has only demonstrated that they've had surgery to remove some vertebrae to suck their own dick, not a factual reality.

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office? There’s a premium placed on the ability to get owned vs other offices. Subject to usual caveats about elite litigators or whatever.

[Anonymous User]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office? There’s a premium placed on the ability to get owned vs other offices. Subject to usual caveats about elite litigators or whatever.

The exceptions are broader than "elite litigation." I am not aware of anyone who thinks that generic NYC BL lit provides superior training to, say, DC BL lit. Certainly NYC is not a powerhouse in regulatory work (again, DC), and there are plenty of sectors where I would assume other cities provide better training.

[Anonymous User]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office? There’s a premium placed on the ability to get owned vs other offices. Subject to usual caveats about elite litigators or whatever.

The exceptions are broader than "elite litigation." I am not aware of anyone who thinks that generic NYC BL lit provides superior training to, say, DC BL lit. Certainly NYC is not a powerhouse in regulatory work (again, DC), and there are plenty of sectors where I would assume other cities provide better training.

Also, whether you’re talking litigation or not, NYC offices are almost universally less selective than other offices of the same firm (or at worst, the same). At my school, NYC BigLaw was the backup option that below median students had to begrudgingly accept when they failed to get any offers in their preferred market. I don’t think the “NYC is superior” perspective is really a thing these days except among New Yorkers.

[Anonymous User]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office? There’s a premium placed on the ability to get owned vs other offices. Subject to usual caveats about elite litigators or whatever.

The exceptions are broader than "elite litigation." I am not aware of anyone who thinks that generic NYC BL lit provides superior training to, say, DC BL lit. Certainly NYC is not a powerhouse in regulatory work (again, DC), and there are plenty of sectors where I would assume other cities provide better training.

Also, whether you’re talking litigation or not, NYC offices are almost universally less selective than other offices of the same firm (or at worst, the same). At my school, NYC BigLaw was the backup option that below median students had to begrudgingly accept when they failed to get any offers in their preferred market. I don’t think the “NYC is superior” perspective is really a thing these days except among New Yorkers.

Yeah, at S (and I presume H/Y to a lesser extent), NYC is seen as good only if you're interested in Corporate (which is a distinct minority of the class). Many people here are California/DC or bust, and TX has gotten a noticeable amount of attention.

Edit: I am in this category, and frankly I'm only really giving NY as much interest as I have because I know more people there than I do in Chicago/Houston, which would be my top choices otherwise

[Sackboy]

bump, with the pandemic (hopefully) nearing its end, is the general sentiment/advice still NYC or bust??

What advice? If you want to live in NYC, go to a firm's NYC office. If not, don't. Training at most biglaw firms is absolute ass everywhere, especially in a remote environment, so you can go get your ass training anywhere. Anyone claiming NYC has the best training has only demonstrated that they've had surgery to remove some vertebrae to suck their own dick, not a factual reality.

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office? There’s a premium placed on the ability to get owned vs other offices. Subject to usual caveats about elite litigators or whatever.

[JusticeHarlan]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office?

[Anonymous User]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office?

I cannot imagine this outside of corporate practices, and even then, probably not all of them.

[Anonymous User]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office?

I cannot imagine this outside of corporate practices, and even then, probably not all of them.

Wouldn't firm still be paramount? Like K&E or Weil Houston >>>> DLA Piper or K&L Gates NYC (I presume). I could see the argument that K&E NY > K&E Houston, but that's splitting hairs

[Anonymous User]

because nowhere else will you be expected to routinely work ungodly hours, and nowhere else will you be subject to the abuse of such a high concentration of sociopaths

US corporate lawyers in HK/Singapore/Seoul/Tokyo offices routinely work at least as many hours as lawyers in NYC do, if not more. Volume of work does not explain it. I worked for over 3 years in NYC and then moved to Asia. Greater number of partners and senior associates from whom you can get work and guidance in NYC is one of the reasons. In the small Asian offices, you are stuck with one or two partners and it's pretty much sink-or-swim all the time with little guidance. When I was in NYC on the other hand, I always had people to whom I could ask questions. You learn better that way because in a sink-or-swim environment, you can learn quickly but there are limits to how much you learn and you could even develop bad habits if your partner does not correct them.

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

[Sackboy]

Isn’t the point more a line item on a resume with a NYC office will generally look better than any other office?

I cannot imagine this outside of corporate practices, and even then, probably not all of them.

Wouldn't firm still be paramount? Like K&E or Weil Houston >>>> DLA Piper or K&L Gates NYC (I presume). I could see the argument that K&E NY > K&E Houston, but that's splitting hairs

I have no clue why the top parent post is attributed to me. I did not type that and do not agree with it at all. As you've said, the firm will be paramount except in a few situations.

[Anonymous User]

It's not. 26 year olds like to convince themselves that it is, but you can get phenomenal experience working in a place like Texas and save a whole lot of money doing the same thing you would be doing in NYC. And, you don't have to live in a closet for $3k per month.

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

What is "training"? I keep see it thrown around. Is it training to work absurd hours and be on so many work streams that you're near to committing malpractice or blowing your brains out? That's what "training" seems to be in the minds of most posters here. Formal training programs almost universally blow and many of the top firms have awful ones, so it certainly can't be that. Is it an allusion to deal size? That pretty much makes no sense too because almost all of my most educational deals have been $20-30 million shitshows and not the $1 billion+ deals I've worked on where sophisticated parties just move it along. I went from a V10 to a boutique, and my training has been 100x better working 20% less hours on generally smaller deals, because partners actually have time for me and I actually have time to do shit the right way instead of cutting corners. Superior "training" is just a term NYers use to jack themselves off for working 2,500 hours to get paid the same as everyone else in other major markets but live in shoeboxes.

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

What is "training"? I keep see it thrown around. Is it training to work absurd hours and be on so many work streams that you're near to committing malpractice or blowing your brains out? That's what "training" seems to be in the minds of most posters here. Formal training programs almost universally blow and many of the top firms have awful ones, so it certainly can't be that. Is it an allusion to deal size? That pretty much makes no sense too because almost all of my most educational deals have been $20-30 million shitshows and not the $1 billion+ deals I've worked on where sophisticated parties just move it along. I went from a V10 to a boutique, and my training has been 100x better working 20% less hours on generally smaller deals, because partners actually have time for me and I actually have time to do shit the right way instead of cutting corners. Superior "training" is just a term NYers use to jack themselves off for working 2,500 hours to get paid the same as everyone else in other major markets but live in shoeboxes.

This is exactly correct. If I see someone works out of the NYC office of a firm, I essentially have a presumption that they aren't very good thinking about their personal finances. Perhaps that's an unfair assumption and often it doesn't really matter, but the though usually goes through my mind at least once. I'll gladly stay at my firm billing 1700 hours forever making the same base (won't get the bonus, but idgaf if it shaves 5-10 years off my life and has me stressed out all the time; the firm can always fire me and then I'll do something else for six figures...who cares).

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

What is "training"? I keep see it thrown around. Is it training to work absurd hours and be on so many work streams that you're near to committing malpractice or blowing your brains out? That's what "training" seems to be in the minds of most posters here. Formal training programs almost universally blow and many of the top firms have awful ones, so it certainly can't be that. Is it an allusion to deal size? That pretty much makes no sense too because almost all of my most educational deals have been $20-30 million shitshows and not the $1 billion+ deals I've worked on where sophisticated parties just move it along. I went from a V10 to a boutique, and my training has been 100x better working 20% less hours on generally smaller deals, because partners actually have time for me and I actually have time to do shit the right way instead of cutting corners. Superior "training" is just a term NYers use to jack themselves off for working 2,500 hours to get paid the same as everyone else in other major markets but live in shoeboxes.

This is exactly correct. If I see someone works out of the NYC office of a firm, I essentially have a presumption that they aren't very good thinking about their personal finances. Perhaps that's an unfair assumption and often it doesn't really matter, but the though usually goes through my mind at least once. I'll gladly stay at my firm billing 1700 hours forever making the same base (won't get the bonus, but idgaf if it shaves 5-10 years off my life and has me stressed out all the time; the firm can always fire me and then I'll do something else for six figures...who cares).

I'm in the Houston office of a big national firm. When I work with associates in NYC I just feel bad for them because they make 11% less money than I do and spend twice as much on COL (for 1/3 of the living space), but here we are staffed on the exact same deal getting the exact same experience lol. Unlike people at a local Texas firm, I think my hours are similar to our NYC office (maybe slightly less), but in exchange I also lose nothing as far as the type/value of deals because the clients are the same. Before COVID, my office also had wayyyy less face time requirements than the NYC office.

These days, I think the only legitimate reasons to practice in NYC are if you have family/connections there, or always wanted to have the "NYC experience" and are OK making sacrifices to get it, or it was your only option. Or, I guess, if you just absolutely hate every other city that would provide similar quality of work.

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

What is "training"? I keep see it thrown around. Is it training to work absurd hours and be on so many work streams that you're near to committing malpractice or blowing your brains out? That's what "training" seems to be in the minds of most posters here. Formal training programs almost universally blow and many of the top firms have awful ones, so it certainly can't be that. Is it an allusion to deal size? That pretty much makes no sense too because almost all of my most educational deals have been $20-30 million shitshows and not the $1 billion+ deals I've worked on where sophisticated parties just move it along. I went from a V10 to a boutique, and my training has been 100x better working 20% less hours on generally smaller deals, because partners actually have time for me and I actually have time to do shit the right way instead of cutting corners. Superior "training" is just a term NYers use to jack themselves off for working 2,500 hours to get paid the same as everyone else in other major markets but live in shoeboxes.

This is exactly correct. If I see someone works out of the NYC office of a firm, I essentially have a presumption that they aren't very good thinking about their personal finances. Perhaps that's an unfair assumption and often it doesn't really matter, but the though usually goes through my mind at least once. I'll gladly stay at my firm billing 1700 hours forever making the same base (won't get the bonus, but idgaf if it shaves 5-10 years off my life and has me stressed out all the time; the firm can always fire me and then I'll do something else for six figures...who cares).

I'm in the Houston office of a big national firm. When I work with associates in NYC I just feel bad for them because they make 11% less money than I do and spend twice as much on COL (for 1/3 of the living space), but here we are staffed on the exact same deal getting the exact same experience lol. Unlike people at a local Texas firm, I think my hours are similar to our NYC office (maybe slightly less), but in exchange I also lose nothing as far as the type/value of deals because the clients are the same. Before COVID, my office also had wayyyy less face time requirements than the NYC office.

These days, I think the only legitimate reasons to practice in NYC are if you have family/connections there, or always wanted to have the "NYC experience" and are OK making sacrifices to get it, or it was your only option. Or, I guess, if you just absolutely hate every other city that would provide similar quality of work.

Second all of these. Deal size is meaningless, and if anything, I think bigger deal sizes will mean much less experience for juniors. $40 billion deal out of NYC, you probably are on a team of at least 20+ attorneys with multiple partners, senior associates, juniors, etc. Juniors aren't going to be thrown any of the interesting work on those.

If you are working a shit show $25-50 million deal in fly-over country in a non-NYC office, you are probably working on a 3-4 person deal team max and are going to be just be exposed to more of the nitty gritty details.

(experiences may vary) My personal experience was that when I worked across from NYC teams from a non-NYC market, their deal teams were always materially larger than ours and most interactions came from a junior partner staffed on the deal.

I will add that I don't think this used to be the case. I think 15 or 20 years ago you HAD to go to NYC to get any sort of good corporate law training. We live in a different world now. Tons of excellent corporate groups and partners that are found nationwide outside of NYC and tons of interesting (and big) deals that are happening entirely outside of NYC.

[Anonymous User]

Isn't the firm relevant as well? Especially in comparing HQ to NY office. Doubt Kirkland Chicago differs in any fundamental way from corporate training received in NY firms.

What is "training"? I keep see it thrown around. Is it training to work absurd hours and be on so many work streams that you're near to committing malpractice or blowing your brains out? That's what "training" seems to be in the minds of most posters here. Formal training programs almost universally blow and many of the top firms have awful ones, so it certainly can't be that. Is it an allusion to deal size? That pretty much makes no sense too because almost all of my most educational deals have been $20-30 million shitshows and not the $1 billion+ deals I've worked on where sophisticated parties just move it along. I went from a V10 to a boutique, and my training has been 100x better working 20% less hours on generally smaller deals, because partners actually have time for me and I actually have time to do shit the right way instead of cutting corners. Superior "training" is just a term NYers use to jack themselves off for working 2,500 hours to get paid the same as everyone else in other major markets but live in shoeboxes.

This is exactly correct. If I see someone works out of the NYC office of a firm, I essentially have a presumption that they aren't very good thinking about their personal finances. Perhaps that's an unfair assumption and often it doesn't really matter, but the though usually goes through my mind at least once. I'll gladly stay at my firm billing 1700 hours forever making the same base (won't get the bonus, but idgaf if it shaves 5-10 years off my life and has me stressed out all the time; the firm can always fire me and then I'll do something else for six figures...who cares).

I'm in the Houston office of a big national firm. When I work with associates in NYC I just feel bad for them because they make 11% less money than I do and spend twice as much on COL (for 1/3 of the living space), but here we are staffed on the exact same deal getting the exact same experience lol. Unlike people at a local Texas firm, I think my hours are similar to our NYC office (maybe slightly less), but in exchange I also lose nothing as far as the type/value of deals because the clients are the same. Before COVID, my office also had wayyyy less face time requirements than the NYC office.

These days, I think the only legitimate reasons to practice in NYC are if you have family/connections there, or always wanted to have the "NYC experience" and are OK making sacrifices to get it, or it was your only option. Or, I guess, if you just absolutely hate every other city that would provide similar quality of work.

Second all of these. Deal size is meaningless, and if anything, I think bigger deal sizes will mean much less experience for juniors. $40 billion deal out of NYC, you probably are on a team of at least 20+ attorneys with multiple partners, senior associates, juniors, etc. Juniors aren't going to be thrown any of the interesting work on those.

If you are working a shit show $25-50 million deal in fly-over country in a non-NYC office, you are probably working on a 3-4 person deal team max and are going to be just be exposed to more of the nitty gritty details.

(experiences may vary) My personal experience was that when I worked across from NYC teams from a non-NYC market, their deal teams were always materially larger than ours and most interactions came from a junior partner staffed on the deal.

I will add that I don't think this used to be the case. I think 15 or 20 years ago you HAD to go to NYC to get any sort of good corporate law training. We live in a different world now. Tons of excellent corporate groups and partners that are found nationwide outside of NYC and tons of interesting (and big) deals that are happening entirely outside of NYC.

I think part of this is that high-value clients (huge corporations, PE firms, VC firms, etc) have also drifted away from NYC. These days SF/SV/LA, TX, DC, Boston, Chicago all have tons of $$$$ that has nothing to do with NYC. I’ve worked on multiple billion dollar mergers where nobody was in NYC: my office, the opposing counsel’s office, the clients, or the portfolio companies.

Also, there are plenty of powerful NYC partners that have left to join or found new offices elsewhere, which contributes to the geographic uniformity.