Is WLRK worth it? Forum

[Buglaw]

I suppose it's possible that someone at WLRK billed 4,000 hours, but I simply don't believe it's ever been done without some pretty generous padding. They were famously one of the last holdouts against itemized bills (don't know if that's still the case) and also do some deals on contingency, so I suppose you could basically just bill for all the time you are physically at the office.

People talk about "80 hour weeks" as almost a shorthand for working long hours, but I don't believe anybody is truly actively producing meaningful work product for nearly 80 full hours a week for 52 weeks straight. That would not only require doing literally nothing but working, eating, and maybe sleeping, but would require an inhuman ability to concentrate for long periods of time.

WLRK hours are generously inflated on that basis, not that anyone has ever billed 4K hours. But as far I know, they still don't itemize their bills, and my friend that worked there (about a decade ago) usually just billed the entire time they were in the office. The clients don't complain about the bills.

This sounds plausible. Obviously someone could lie their way to 4000 hours. Spending 80 plus hours a week at work is not really even outside what happens to a lot of corporate associates in the v10. So, clearly people can lie their way to 4000 hours.

But whenever I bill 80ish hours in a week, I'm "at work" much more than that and I am probably averaging 4-5 hours a sleep a night (Monday through Sunday, so including weekends). I am also doing nothing but working and sleeping. So to billing 4000 hours a year, means people are doing nothing but working and sleeping and averaged probably 4 hours a night of sleep for 365 days a year while "at work" probably 18-20 hours a day. I don't believe it's physically possible.

I also worked with someone who was a banker at Goldman. He told me it really wasn't much/any worse than what we were doing (but different). That year my hours were high, but I didn't hit 3K. I call bullshit on anyone's claim of 4000 hours.

Respectfully dude, and I'm sure you're a fantastic lawyer, but this is something that is clearly outside of your lane and something you don't know too much about. First with regards to banking: it was only a couple of months ago where the infamous Goldman report leaked and Goldman's bankers begged to work only 80-hour weeks: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

(And because you seem like the type to point out the sample size of the report, I can also tell you I worked in ibanking before HYS (one of Goldman/JP Morgan/Morgan Stanley) and genuinely was at work 90-100 hours a week for the entire year. When it got super busy, it approached 110+ hours. Other ibankers will tell you the same thing.)

Other than this year, biglaw hours is like a vacation compared to my banking hours... and when all this shit slows down (hopefully soon), I will get back down to 2000-2500 hours. People at Wachtell will get back down to 3500 hours.

Again, there's a reason why Wachtell compensation is higher. It's not because you're only working a bit more than your V10, V20, etc. You're working a whole lot more, like actual ibanking hours. Ultimately, it's a personal question of whether the extra hours is worth the extra compensation.

I have no idea what you mean or how you would know it's outside my lane. I mean I've seen the hours reports at the v10 firms I've worked at. There were less than 10-20 people a year billing 3000 hours a year out of hundreds or 1000+ associated. I have been consistently in the top 10-15% in hours at these firms and never really been in danger of hitting 3k (highest was around 2800). I've also interviewed a couple wachtell associates who told me they were above 2500 every year but didn't hit 3k. I have a few banker friends and have worked with a Goldman banker who saw how much I/we were working. Maybe the firms, my colleagues, my interviewees and my friend are all lying to me. Or maybe you are speaking out of your ass.

As to the survey you quoted. Everybody lies about how much they work. Self reported hours worked are notoriously inaccurate, especially at institutions where everyone brags about how much they work.

[jotarokujo]

Genuinely think that the law students in this thread do not realize that time spent logging into their computer, going to the bathroom, getting up to pour yourself coffee etc. adds up and is not billable time. A Goldman banker goes into the office, but takes time peeing and eating and even responding to a text from Mom--that gets counted in her 100 hour a week calculation because its all time between log-on and log-off. That's distinct from hours billed where its timer on timer off every time I realize a day dream lasted too long or I spent a little too much time trying to get out my previous night's dinner.

but even with all of non-billable stuff added, the "average" week for biglaw is nowhere near 100 hours, it's more like 60

I don't believe the "average" week for any profession (bankers included) is truly 100 hours. People may put in the occasional 100 hour week, but not for 52 weeks straight. Perhaps some medical residents did that (before the work hour restrictions), but they literally have beds for their use in hospitals. They aren't just commuting home to their apartments after work.

bankers aren't at 100 but they are certainly above 60. probably somewhere around 75

[nealric]

As to the survey you quoted. Everybody lies about how much they work. Self reported hours worked are notoriously inaccurate, especially at institutions where everyone brags about how much they work.

Lying about hours is common throughout the professional world. A certain class of folks think working long hours means your work must be very important, so telling everyone you work long hours is a way of bragging about how successful/important you are.

Apropos:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04 ... lying.html

[Buglaw]

Genuinely think that the law students in this thread do not realize that time spent logging into their computer, going to the bathroom, getting up to pour yourself coffee etc. adds up and is not billable time. A Goldman banker goes into the office, but takes time peeing and eating and even responding to a text from Mom--that gets counted in her 100 hour a week calculation because its all time between log-on and log-off. That's distinct from hours billed where its timer on timer off every time I realize a day dream lasted too long or I spent a little too much time trying to get out my previous night's dinner.

but even with all of non-billable stuff added, the "average" week for biglaw is nowhere near 100 hours, it's more like 60

I don't believe the "average" week for any profession (bankers included) is truly 100 hours. People may put in the occasional 100 hour week, but not for 52 weeks straight. Perhaps some medical residents did that (before the work hour restrictions), but they literally have beds for their use in hospitals. They aren't just commuting home to their apartments after work.

bankers aren't at 100 but they are certainly above 60. probably somewhere around 75

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

[tlsguy2020]

Genuinely think that the law students in this thread do not realize that time spent logging into their computer, going to the bathroom, getting up to pour yourself coffee etc. adds up and is not billable time. A Goldman banker goes into the office, but takes time peeing and eating and even responding to a text from Mom--that gets counted in her 100 hour a week calculation because its all time between log-on and log-off. That's distinct from hours billed where its timer on timer off every time I realize a day dream lasted too long or I spent a little too much time trying to get out my previous night's dinner.

but even with all of non-billable stuff added, the "average" week for biglaw is nowhere near 100 hours, it's more like 60

I don't believe the "average" week for any profession (bankers included) is truly 100 hours. People may put in the occasional 100 hour week, but not for 52 weeks straight. Perhaps some medical residents did that (before the work hour restrictions), but they literally have beds for their use in hospitals. They aren't just commuting home to their apartments after work.

bankers aren't at 100 but they are certainly above 60. probably somewhere around 75

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

Everyone can squabble about how much bankers and lawyers honestly do and don’t work, but let’s not forget that this was triggered by someone insisting that WLRK attorneys regularly BILL FOUR THOUSAND HOURS a year. As if saying what’s actually true (somewhere near 3000) isn’t oppressive enough and completely out-of-norm for almost all Biglaw associates.

[Anonymous User]

Genuinely think that the law students in this thread do not realize that time spent logging into their computer, going to the bathroom, getting up to pour yourself coffee etc. adds up and is not billable time. A Goldman banker goes into the office, but takes time peeing and eating and even responding to a text from Mom--that gets counted in her 100 hour a week calculation because its all time between log-on and log-off. That's distinct from hours billed where its timer on timer off every time I realize a day dream lasted too long or I spent a little too much time trying to get out my previous night's dinner.

but even with all of non-billable stuff added, the "average" week for biglaw is nowhere near 100 hours, it's more like 60

I don't believe the "average" week for any profession (bankers included) is truly 100 hours. People may put in the occasional 100 hour week, but not for 52 weeks straight. Perhaps some medical residents did that (before the work hour restrictions), but they literally have beds for their use in hospitals. They aren't just commuting home to their apartments after work.

bankers aren't at 100 but they are certainly above 60. probably somewhere around 75

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

Everyone can squabble about how much bankers and lawyers honestly do and don’t work, but let’s not forget that this was triggered by someone insisting that WLRK attorneys regularly BILL FOUR THOUSAND HOURS a year. As if saying what’s actually true (somewhere near 3000) isn’t oppressive enough and completely out-of-norm for almost all Biglaw associates.

Unless it’s been edited, I don’t see any post where someone said Wachtell regularly bills 4000 hours?

[Anonymous User]

I suppose it's possible that someone at WLRK billed 4,000 hours, but I simply don't believe it's ever been done without some pretty generous padding. They were famously one of the last holdouts against itemized bills (don't know if that's still the case) and also do some deals on contingency, so I suppose you could basically just bill for all the time you are physically at the office.

People talk about "80 hour weeks" as almost a shorthand for working long hours, but I don't believe anybody is truly actively producing meaningful work product for nearly 80 full hours a week for 52 weeks straight. That would not only require doing literally nothing but working, eating, and maybe sleeping, but would require an inhuman ability to concentrate for long periods of time.

WLRK hours are generously inflated on that basis, not that anyone has ever billed 4K hours. But as far I know, they still don't itemize their bills, and my friend that worked there (about a decade ago) usually just billed the entire time they were in the office. The clients don't complain about the bills.

This sounds plausible. Obviously someone could lie their way to 4000 hours. Spending 80 plus hours a week at work is not really even outside what happens to a lot of corporate associates in the v10. So, clearly people can lie their way to 4000 hours.

But whenever I bill 80ish hours in a week, I'm "at work" much more than that and I am probably averaging 4-5 hours a sleep a night (Monday through Sunday, so including weekends). I am also doing nothing but working and sleeping. So to billing 4000 hours a year, means people are doing nothing but working and sleeping and averaged probably 4 hours a night of sleep for 365 days a year while "at work" probably 18-20 hours a day. I don't believe it's physically possible.

I also worked with someone who was a banker at Goldman. He told me it really wasn't much/any worse than what we were doing (but different). That year my hours were high, but I didn't hit 3K. I call bullshit on anyone's claim of 4000 hours.

Respectfully dude, and I'm sure you're a fantastic lawyer, but this is something that is clearly outside of your lane and something you don't know too much about. First with regards to banking: it was only a couple of months ago where the infamous Goldman report leaked and Goldman's bankers begged to work only 80-hour weeks: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

(And because you seem like the type to point out the sample size of the report, I can also tell you I worked in ibanking before HYS (one of Goldman/JP Morgan/Morgan Stanley) and genuinely was at work 90-100 hours a week for the entire year. When it got super busy, it approached 110+ hours. Other ibankers will tell you the same thing.)

Other than this year, biglaw hours is like a vacation compared to my banking hours... and when all this shit slows down (hopefully soon), I will get back down to 2000-2500 hours. People at Wachtell will get back down to 3500 hours.

Again, there's a reason why Wachtell compensation is higher. It's not because you're only working a bit more than your V10, V20, etc. You're working a whole lot more, like actual ibanking hours. Ultimately, it's a personal question of whether the extra hours is worth the extra compensation.

Epic way to say you worked at JPM. And phenomenal name drop re HYS when nobody asked. Plaudits to you good sir.

[Anonymous User]

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

It's not. I've done it. Just really, really sucks.

You clearly don't work at WLRK (or in investment banking), not sure why you keep posting about it.

[Buglaw]

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

It's not. I've done it. Just really, really sucks.

You clearly don't work at WLRK (or in investment banking), not sure why you keep posting about it.

Are you a current WLRK associate? If not why do you keep posting about them billing 4k hours? You are the one who made the stupid claim.

Edit:

Hear is a nice poll from WSO (the banking equivalent of tls). I realize it's not a 12 person bitch fest document, but seems like a bit better of a sample. As noted by myself and others self reported hours are notoriously high, so 70-80, while high, is not noticeably different than what some corporate associates are doing.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... qQ&ampcf=1

[Anonymous User]

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

It's not. I've done it. Just really, really sucks.

You clearly don't work at WLRK (or in investment banking), not sure why you keep posting about it.

Great, thank you! Another poster who understands & has experience with Wachtell hours and/or investment banking. I'm not sure why Buglaw is so determined to try to prove something he doesn't understand. You'll be laughed at if you suggest your V10 has similar hours as Goldman TMT.

[Anonymous User]

It’s interesting that the OP seems not to have posted since being outed for not actually having an offer from WLRK. Meanwhile, a number of other people who don’t work at WLRK or have offers at WLRK continue to speculate on what life is like as an associate at WLRK. If you actually get an offer from WLRK you’ll have the opportunity, and indeed will be encouraged, to speak with actual associates at WLRK about what life is like as an associate at WLRK. Then you can make your own decision.

[Anonymous User]

I know several people at Wachtell. They billed close to 4000 hours last year and are projected to surpass that this year. Let's not trivialize just how much more you are working at Wachtell. Good rule of thumb is you will work about 1000 more hours than at your V10.

Not even backtracking but want to make clear that I have never claimed someone at Wachtell is regularly billing 4000 hours. But people are coming dangerously close the past couple of years due to the market being bonkers.

As for WLRK hours in normal times, people have long posted about it on this forum (as well as on other sites like Fishbowl, AutoAdmit back in the day, etc.):

• From 2011: "I've spoken to a number of associates at S&C, DPW, Cleary and STB. Their typical billable hours per year range from 2100 to 2500. I've also spoken to associates at Wachtell and they say 2700 is on the low end with 3000 being the norm. 3100-3200 if you really want partner." viewtopic.php?f=23&t=158091&start=75

• From 2011: "If billing 3000-3500 hours doesn't sound like fun, then you're instincts are probably right." viewtopic.php?f=23&t=155698&start=75

• From 2011: "Cole has been invisible because he's been working hard -- very hard. "I've been billing 3,400 hours a year for the last seven years," he says." viewtopic.php?f=23&t=158091&start=50

• From 2016: "I was an associate at WLRK. I can tell you that you'll be working at least 2600 in litigation and probably around 2800 in Corp depending on deal flow. It is not unusual for corporate folks to log 3000 hours." viewtopic.php?f=23&t=268641

• From 2021: "I have three friends who work/worked there in litigation, one for one, one for two years, one for more than two, and for each one in every single year they billed >3k. My one friend who did corporate first year did 3600." viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308352

[Anonymous User]

Sure, but no way to bill 80 hours in 60 hours. Another reason that claim is stupid. People at Wachtell aren't actually working 90-100 actual average hours a week. (which probably requires multiple 130-140+ hours in a year which I think is impossible).

It's not. I've done it. Just really, really sucks.

You clearly don't work at WLRK (or in investment banking), not sure why you keep posting about it.

Are you a current WLRK associate? If not why do you keep posting about them billing 4k hours? You are the one who made the stupid claim.

Yes, but I'm not the "4,000 hours" poster. Just a lurker.

[ksm6969]

Just wanted to say that i appreciate that the response to “people don’t really work 4,000 hours, but people are notorious for lying to their friends/coworkers about how much they work” is to find a bunch of posts Over the last 10 years on tls saying “my friend at wlrk told me he worked XYZ hours.” (None of which come close to 4000 anyway).