Biglawyers. Are any of you happy? Was this job better than others you've had? Forum

[A. Nony Mouse]

Nothing's a guarantee, though. HLS and YLS grads can fuck up their lives just as effectively as anyone else.

[Desert Fox]

Nothing's a guarantee, though. HLS and YLS grads can fuck up their lives just as effectively as anyone else.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 3&t=259657

I'm interested in this topic

[nealric]

I don't doubt there are people who grew up around successful blue collar business owner-types in midwestern cities, but understand they are the exception. And most of those types weren't living like biglaw associates at the age of 25.
.

I sure hope they weren't - paying over 3k to live in a small one bedroom apt! Lol. The COL has risen dramatically in NYC/SF/DC, etc. since they were 25. I bet the rich blue collar business owners at 25 were living in a house, paying like $400 bucks a month or something, and could afford a car. Even though they made less money, adjusted for inflation and COL, it probably wasn't that much less.

Case in point - my uncle bought a house for $500k 20 years ago in the Bay Area, now worth over $4 million.....so yeah, they weren't living like we were at 25 since everything was mad cheap. That house was probably $200k when he was 25. Now it's $4 million.

There's a reason why a small one bedroom apartment in Manhattan is $3k a month now and wasn't in 1975- it was a crime ridden cesspool then. Now it's very safe cesspool

They also probably thought going to Denny's was a huge splurge at that age, while many jr. biglaw associates will think nothing of spending $100 on a night out.

[Tls2016]

There is a big difference in the cost of housing in NYC which has gone up dramatically over the past 5 years. I think grads right before and even those who got jobs during the recession were not paying the rent that new grads face in NYC now.

I could be wrong but it seems much higher than 5 or7 years ago. I don't think many other housing markets has gone up the same, though some in California are even more insane.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

There's a reason why a small one bedroom apartment in Manhattan is $3k a month now and wasn't in 1975- it was a crime ridden cesspool then. Now it's very safe cesspool

They also probably thought going to Denny's was a huge splurge at that age, while many jr. biglaw associates will think nothing of spending $100 on a night out.

Crime rates only partly explain property values. Your theory wouldn't explain why NYC rents increased at a faster rate in the past 15 years, when the rate of decrease in the crime rate was smallest, or why a place like Oakland continues to explode in value despite remaining a violent hellhole.

There are like nine good reasons why young NYC residents get absolutely fucked on rent, but Manhattan actually being nice doesn't rank highly.

[Anonymous User]

Do big law firms typically trace web usage? I'm not talking about going onto inappropriate websites, but more the random and unpredictable web viewings of the ADD'd - i.e. going from a legal dictionary to yoga how to's to data room to amazon to data room to Puppy stairs all in a 15 minute period, and similar periods for roughly 14 hours a day?

And being from New York, crime rates have had an impact on rent but it's tangential and not direct as was suggested. High rents are mostly due to 2 reasons in New York, and these reasons feed off each other. (1) The vast majority (>66% I think) of apartments are rent controlled so the supply and demand is limited as most apartments that are rented out are never going to go on the market as the tenants would have to be dumb to leave. From the start you have a major supply and demand problem.

New York is a destination spot and business hub so you have people from around the globe with high paying jobs and big portfolios moving into New York. France and England rich are much richer than American rich is so you have a lot of rich mofo's competing for a small pool of apartments as a result of rent control. Alas, the supply and demand favors the sellers more in NYC than almost anywhere else in the world. It's the perfect alignment of law and surrounding circumstances to bone every non-silver spooned kid.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Do big law firms typically trace web usage? I'm not talking about going onto inappropriate websites, but more the random and unpredictable web viewings of the ADD'd - i.e. going from a legal dictionary to yoga how to's to data room to amazon to data room to Puppy stairs all in a 15 minute period, and similar periods for roughly 14 hours a day?

And being from New York, crime rates have had an impact on rent but it's tangential and not direct as was suggested. High rents are mostly due to 2 reasons in New York, and these reasons feed off each other. (1) The vast majority (>66% I think) of apartments are rent controlled so the supply and demand is limited as most apartments that are rented out are never going to go on the market as the tenants would have to be dumb to leave. From the start you have a major supply and demand problem.

New York is a destination spot and business hub so you have people from around the globe with high paying jobs and big portfolios moving into New York. France and England rich are much richer than American rich is so you have a lot of rich mofo's competing for a small pool of apartments as a result of rent control. Alas, the supply and demand favors the sellers more in NYC than almost anywhere else in the world. It's the perfect alignment of law and surrounding circumstances to bone every non-silver spooned kid.

Well, about half are rent-stabilized. Rent control is a small-scale special giveaway to dynastic NYC real estate owners (mostly wealthy). Rent stabilized units, which usually cost around half of market rents, are almost never given up, for obvious reasons. But also fucking you in the ass are the following:

-NYC zoning is one of the most expensive and onerous bureaucratic hoops to jump through to construct new units. Even in residentially zoned areas, there are restrictions on density, building height, and lot size that prevent developers from constructing as many units as the market would provide.

-NYC maintenance/facade/building codes are among the most expensive in the country, adding to development costs.

-Absolutely everyone involved in building constructions is unionized to high heaven and frequently operate on exclusive contracts. Average construction dudes can make six figures, and machine operators can make several hundred thousand a year, again adding to development costs.

-It's still illegal, in most circumstances, to provide units smaller than 400 square feet, despite the fact that it would increase developer profits and lower the average cost of a unit.

-Developers are often required to provide "affordable" units in new middle-class housing construction, which increases the cost on everyone else.

-Public housing in otherwise desirable areas takes away lots and makes an area less desirable, driving them to other areas where they provide upward pressure on rents.

-Property tax on owners of multiunit buildings are insane and among the highest in the country.

[Anonymous User]

Do big law firms typically trace web usage? I'm not talking about going onto inappropriate websites, but more the random and unpredictable web viewings of the ADD'd - i.e. going from a legal dictionary to yoga how to's to data room to amazon to data room to Puppy stairs all in a 15 minute period, and similar periods for roughly 14 hours a day?

And being from New York, crime rates have had an impact on rent but it's tangential and not direct as was suggested. High rents are mostly due to 2 reasons in New York, and these reasons feed off each other. (1) The vast majority (>66% I think) of apartments are rent controlled so the supply and demand is limited as most apartments that are rented out are never going to go on the market as the tenants would have to be dumb to leave. From the start you have a major supply and demand problem.

New York is a destination spot and business hub so you have people from around the globe with high paying jobs and big portfolios moving into New York. France and England rich are much richer than American rich is so you have a lot of rich mofo's competing for a small pool of apartments as a result of rent control. Alas, the supply and demand favors the sellers more in NYC than almost anywhere else in the world. It's the perfect alignment of law and surrounding circumstances to bone every non-silver spooned kid.

Well, about half are rent-stabilized. Rent control is a small-scale special giveaway to dynastic NYC real estate owners (mostly wealthy). Rent stabilized units, which usually cost around half of market rents, are almost never given up, for obvious reasons. But also fucking you in the ass are the following:

-NYC zoning is one of the most expensive and onerous bureaucratic hoops to jump through to construct new units. Even in residentially zoned areas, there are restrictions on density, building height, and lot size that prevent developers from constructing as many units as the market would provide.

-NYC maintenance/facade/building codes are among the most expensive in the country, adding to development costs.

-Absolutely everyone involved in building constructions is unionized to high heaven and frequently operate on exclusive contracts. Average construction dudes can make six figures, and machine operators can make several hundred thousand a year, again adding to development costs.

-It's still illegal, in most circumstances, to provide units smaller than 400 square feet, despite the fact that it would increase developer profits and lower the average cost of a unit.

-Developers are often required to provide "affordable" units in new middle-class housing construction, which increases the cost on everyone else.

-Public housing in otherwise desirable areas takes away lots and makes an area less desirable, driving them to other areas where they provide upward pressure on rents.

-Property tax on owners of multiunit buildings are insane and among the highest in the country.

Don't forget the challenge inherent in trying to buy up property owned by disparate business owners/tenants/property owners. If you want to build a new apartment tower, at some point everyone on the block is going to realize what is going on and people are going to start demanding several times "market" to sell out.

If you look up who qualifies for "affordable" housing in new construction (421-a program), it's all middle class people - I think the income level is like 80K or something. Most new construction is luxury targeted at yuppies and young families still saving for a downpayment on a Brooklyn townhouse. Manhattan and the pricier Brooklyn neighborhoods just don't have a "middle class" to speak of, you're either upper class with a family, yuppies (either rich or living in a closet with 5 other people), or living in public housing.

Still, construction can move very fast without these issues. Those new TF Cornerstone apartment buildings in LIC are a prime example.

edit: timbs.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Most of the income caps on the affordable housing set-asides are not higher than $50-$60k. Frequently they're lower than that.

It's nonetheless not helpful to any lawyer because they have debt levels that leave them effectively at the same standard of living, but they can't qualify for lotteries and trust-fund kids in fields like design and PR can.

[nealric]

There's a reason why a small one bedroom apartment in Manhattan is $3k a month now and wasn't in 1975- it was a crime ridden cesspool then. Now it's very safe cesspool

They also probably thought going to Denny's was a huge splurge at that age, while many jr. biglaw associates will think nothing of spending $100 on a night out.

Crime rates only partly explain property values. Your theory wouldn't explain why NYC rents increased at a faster rate in the past 15 years, when the rate of decrease in the crime rate was smallest, or why a place like Oakland continues to explode in value despite remaining a violent hellhole.

There are like nine good reasons why young NYC residents get absolutely fucked on rent, but Manhattan actually being nice doesn't rank highly.

The comment wasn't really intended as a serious explanation for crazy NYC rents. Crime is a bit of a chicken and egg thing. Though I will say that crime reductions often precede rent increases. People have to feel a neighborhood is safe before they start investing. It's once the new investment has lead to new business and renovations that the property values really start to skyrocket. Manhattan also has the distinction of being the place where the global elite like to park their wealth- a phenomenon that didn't start in earnest until the rapid rise of the BRIC countries in the 00's produced large numbers of multi-millionaires and billionaires in countries without safe currencies or governments. When Russian billionaires drop $100 million on apartments they don't even intend to live in, it causes a trickle down effect in the market. Both SF and Manhattan also have the distinction of being the hubs of growing metro regions with limited land mass and bureaucratic red tape that prevents unlimited increases in density to compensate. Rent subsidies and rent control for the poor and middle class also drive up rents from the other side of the equation.

In any event, I think whatever financial mysery experienced by biglaw associates can be substantially reduced by avoiding the east coast and SF to the extent possible. $160k certainly goes a lot farther in Houston or Chicago.

[whysoseriousbiglaw]

Biglaw isn't worth it. I'd easily take a 50% paycut for a 40 hour work week and less stress.

[r6_philly]

Biglaw isn't worth it. I'd easily take a 50% paycut for a 40 hour work week and less stress.

I just left biglaw. Obviously I didn't love it. But it was worth it, and it was better than I expected. Would do it over again without a doubt. But now onto better pursuits.

[whysoseriousbiglaw]

Biglaw isn't worth it. I'd easily take a 50% paycut for a 40 hour work week and less stress.

I just left biglaw. Obviously I didn't love it. But it was worth it, and it was better than I expected. Would do it over again without a doubt. But now onto better pursuits.

How long were you in it for? What you doing now?

I'm a midlevel and it only gets worse....

[r6_philly]

How long were you in it for? What you doing now?

I'm a midlevel and it only gets worse....

Was a junior. I completely agree , that's why I am glad that the timing worked out that I can do this now. I'm launching a small boutique with the goal of providing biglaw caliber service through innovation and efficiency.

[Tls2016]

How long were you in it for? What you doing now?

I'm a midlevel and it only gets worse....

Was a junior. I completely agree , that's why I am glad that the timing worked out that I can do this now. I'm launching a small boutique with the goal of providing biglaw caliber service through innovation and efficiency.

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

[r6_philly]

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

No you remembered wrong, maybe got me mixed up with someone else, I was always posting. I know I was going to start in biglaw, but I had a different perspective of what you can get out of it. And I got what I want out of it (training, experience, prestige).

[Tls2016]

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

No you remembered wrong, maybe got me mixed up with someone else, I was always posting. I know I was going to start in biglaw, but I had a different perspective of what you can get out of it. And I got what I want out of it (training, experience, prestige).

Sorry. It was a long time ago. I know there used to be a big "models and bottles" pro the money in biglaw group of posters, but that was years ago.

[jrass]

How long were you in it for? What you doing now?

I'm a midlevel and it only gets worse....

Was a junior. I completely agree , that's why I am glad that the timing worked out that I can do this now. I'm launching a small boutique with the goal of providing biglaw caliber service through innovation and efficiency.

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

People are more down to earth and care a lot more about pro bono than I expected. It may be an unrepresentative sample size, but the partners in big law are much more pleasant than legal aid bosses. My legal aid boss never cared about developing me, and my role was making sure they could go home by 2 or only work 2 or 3 days a week. In big law, you are on a team and people care more about my development than I would have thought. I've never gotten the vibe that all people care about is money. My experience has been every case in big law, pro bono or not, is treated as being equally important where as the higher ups in legal aid take advantage of interns to get away with doing as little work as possible. I think one of the untalked about benefits of summer associate programs and the like is that once money is invested, the firms are motivated to develop the people they're hiring.

[r6_philly]

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

No you remembered wrong, maybe got me mixed up with someone else, I was always posting. I know I was going to start in biglaw, but I had a different perspective of what you can get out of it. And I got what I want out of it (training, experience, prestige).

Sorry. It was a long time ago. I know there used to be a big "models and bottles" pro the money in biglaw group of posters, but that was years ago.

It's okay, I participated it in those conversations (10k post was a lot lol), at least pre-law school because it was a stressful time and this place was entertainment. I posted very little once in law school, and pretty much non after I started at the firm. But I will probably start a AMA thread now that I am free to post again, and I have some different thoughts to share.

[r6_philly]

People are more down to earth and care a lot more about pro bono than I expected. It may be an unrepresentative sample size, but the partners in big law are much more pleasant than legal aid bosses. My legal aid boss never cared about developing me, and my role was making sure they could go home by 2 or only work 2 or 3 days a week. In big law, you are on a team and people care more about my development than I would have thought. I've never gotten the vibe that all people care about is money. My experience has been every case in big law, pro bono or not, is treated as being equally important where as the higher ups in legal aid take advantage of interns to get away with doing as little work as possible.

Biglaw people are still people, and there are good and not so good people anywhere, why would biglaw be different. What I think works for biglaw is that it is after all a business. After the large investment they made in hiring an associate, it makes sense to try to help that asset develop (as any other capital investments). However, that incentive diminishes over time. Plus, young associates start to solidify what they really want out of their careers and lives. Therefore, by 2-3 years in, the goals of associates and partners diverge and it becomes harder for the seamless teamwork. Also, by the second year, most are bombarded with lateral and other opportunities, and those things creates doubts as to whether you are in the right place.

I have met some really great people in biglaw, and it was sad to no longer work with them. But, at the end of the day, I have a vision for my career that was not going to be served best by the biglaw model at this point. I would probably being a partner in biglaw (to an extent), but I was ready to not be an associate.

As for legal aid, I really enjoyed my brief experience at legal aid, but it's a different business model and different set of incentives there...

[Tls2016]

How long were you in it for? What you doing now?

I'm a midlevel and it only gets worse....

Was a junior. I completely agree , that's why I am glad that the timing worked out that I can do this now. I'm launching a small boutique with the goal of providing biglaw caliber service through innovation and efficiency.

I seem to recall you being all about biglaw, the money and "models and bottles" back when you were in school. Was reality different than you expected?

People are more down to earth and care a lot more about pro bono than I expected. It may be an unrepresentative sample size, but the partners in big law are much more pleasant than legal aid bosses. My legal aid boss never cared about developing me, and my role was making sure they could go home by 2 or only work 2 or 3 days a week. In big law, you are on a team and people care more about my development than I would have thought. I've never gotten the vibe that all people care about is money. My experience has been every case in big law, pro bono or not, is treated as being equally important where as the higher ups in legal aid take advantage of interns to get away with doing as little work as possible. I think one of the untalked about benefits of summer associate programs and the like is that once money is invested, the firms are motivated to develop the people they're hiring.

I never worked for Legal Aid, but I did plenty of pro bono in biglaw. Got to work on a Supreme Court case, even got admitted to practice there, and go to the argument at firm expense even being in corporate. ( There was a unique corporate structure issue that I recognized)
No one ever questioned my time. And we had unlimited resources. The partners care about that stuff and it makes them look good.

The people on TLS who back in the day were talking about the money being great, as R Philly reminded me, were the 0Ls. In the firm, not so much, maybe because people see reality? Anyway, I see that sentiment expressed much less frequently on TLS.

[r6_philly]

How many of your peers would be happier taking home half as much but can keep a strictly 10-6 schedule, no weekends, and can leave your bb/phone/laptop at the office? I think biglaw is a lot of money, but for the amount of sacrifice you have to make, it is disproportionally low.Another gripe I have, there is no incentive to do anything other than what the rest of your class is doing. I enjoy working hard, getting ahead, and reaping the rewards of my hard labor, sweat and blood. Biglaw does not reward that, at least not adequately.

[Tls2016]

How many of your peers would be happier taking home half as much but can keep a strictly 10-6 schedule, no weekends, and can leave your bb/phone/laptop at the office? I think biglaw is a lot of money, but for the amount of sacrifice you have to make, it is disproportionally low.Another gripe I have, there is no incentive to do anything other than what the rest of your class is doing. I enjoy working hard, getting ahead, and reaping the rewards of my hard labor, sweat and blood. Biglaw does not reward that, at least not adequately.

Most everyone wants control of their hours. Probably some juniors would prefer to keep the money because they have loans they want to pay off and get out ASAP. Though few of them last that long.
A few people gunning for partner and loving biglaw are happy with their life. These people do exist. I have found that their main characteristic is they don't need much sleep.
But I'm not in biglaw anymore because I realized I wanted a different life.

[r6_philly]

How many of your peers would be happier taking home half as much but can keep a strictly 10-6 schedule, no weekends, and can leave your bb/phone/laptop at the office? I think biglaw is a lot of money, but for the amount of sacrifice you have to make, it is disproportionally low.Another gripe I have, there is no incentive to do anything other than what the rest of your class is doing. I enjoy working hard, getting ahead, and reaping the rewards of my hard labor, sweat and blood. Biglaw does not reward that, at least not adequately.

Most everyone wants control of their hours. Probably some juniors would prefer to keep the money because they have loans they want to pay off and get out ASAP. Though few of them last that long.
A few people gunning for partner and loving biglaw are happy with their life. These people do exist. I have found that their main characteristic is they don't need much sleep.
But I'm not in biglaw anymore because I realized I wanted a different life.

I don't doubt that the partners or the people who are gunning for partners are happy with their lives. I simply think I cannot be happy under those conditions. I have a family and kids, and they will always be my priority.

And to clarify, I don't even mean that I must have control of my hours. But for a junior to be available 14 hours a day 7 days a week, $160-200k is not really that much compensation (thats 5000 hours a year for a paltry $30-40/hour). If I want to put in that kind of hours (and I will with my own practice), I want to at least be compensated with the bulk of the revenue/profit. Or have the option to not be available 14/7.

[whysoseriousbiglaw]

How many of your peers would be happier taking home half as much but can keep a strictly 10-6 schedule, no weekends, and can leave your bb/phone/laptop at the office? I think biglaw is a lot of money, but for the amount of sacrifice you have to make, it is disproportionally low.Another gripe I have, there is no incentive to do anything other than what the rest of your class is doing. I enjoy working hard, getting ahead, and reaping the rewards of my hard labor, sweat and blood. Biglaw does not reward that, at least not adequately.

Yep, true. Although I will say I know some people who think the associate money is so good that it's worth staying 7+ years for despite all of the sacrifices. (These types tend to have never had another job, so they had nothing better to compare it to; probably grew up relatively poor (just stating facts - if you think the money is that fantastic, your perspective is skewed); and/or stupidly bought a place in a big expensive city and are now tied down to the market due to a big mortgage.)