I got fired from Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP Forum

[History_Buff]

Gotta love the misanthropic circle jerk of tls.

What the hell is your problem, dude? Disagreeing over the shittiness of a job is really weird.

[jbagelboy]

not sure why First Offense is taking such heat

yea big law is horrible at large firms ect but his original comment was, I don't see what's so surprising or novel about this situation, someone who wasn't doing very well or working very hard and effectively admits as much in a competitive work environment was let go in a relatively reasonable way.

And honestly, I guess I feel the same way. I don't blame the writer at all for basically self-terminating, even from a firm at the very top of the elite food chain (or ESPECIALLY from such a firm), but I also don't have much pity for him, since he hated his work and clearly didn't want to be there and admits to not having done very much in the months before his departure. And it's not like he was shit-canned with no warning within his first year, or had his offer rescinded as a 3L, or was immediately fired and escorted out of the building. This doesn't actually reflect that badly on DPW beyond it being a large law firm that's generically awful. As far as being fired goes, there's so much worse out there in the American workplace.

I honestly don't think this article really illustrates anything we don't already know, except to reinforce the idea that there's definitely some passive aggression in this firm's culture

ETA: I guess he did describe the writer as an 'entitled brat', which I wouldn't cosign, but I don't have much empathy here

[Desert Fox]

[itbdvorm]

This type of firing is SOP at all big law. Anyone telling you otherwise is ignorant. Probably half the people who lateral out had this happen but just don't talk about it.

Agree.

The point of this story and this post (at least to me) seemed to be that, well, DPW fired people too during downturn (which I have said before - everyone did). Just optics/PR of how they did it.

Good luck finding anyone in biglaw these days able to sneak out at 4 PM to read a novel

[proctor_right_in_the]

Post removed.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I've already said this rings pretty true to me for anyone getting fired from this kind of a job. I don't think he's claiming to be unusual (or even looking for sympathy), he's just describing what the experience was like. Just because there are a lot worse ways to be fired doesn't make getting fired any more pleasant; you still react the way you react, emotionally, even if you could have seen it coming (and clearly he saw it coming and just tried to deny it). I'm sure this is what happens, all the time, and how it happens, but people write about their own experiences of very common phenomena all the time.

(I also think people are underestimating the 2009 context a little.)

[yomisterd]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

[jbagelboy]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

no. this isn't a no offer bullshit scenario. the moral of the story is that any firm will ask a third/fourth year associate to leave who isn't perceived as doing the right level of work when the economy sucks, not that davis polk does anything specifically wrong

[chuckbass]

at least they have selfie sticks

[yomisterd]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

no. this isn't a no offer bullshit scenario. the moral of the story is that any firm will ask a third/fourth year associate to leave who isn't perceived as doing the right level of work when the economy sucks, not that davis polk does anything specifically wrong

so moral = maintain illusion of busyness at all times.

[Desert Fox]

[84651846190]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

no. this isn't a no offer bullshit scenario. the moral of the story is that any firm will ask a third/fourth year associate to leave who isn't perceived as doing the right level of work when the economy sucks, not that davis polk does anything specifically wrong

so moral = maintain illusion of busyness at all times.

illusions don't really matter when any partner can see exactly what your billables are for the year

[PMan99]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

no. this isn't a no offer bullshit scenario. the moral of the story is that any firm will ask a third/fourth year associate to leave who isn't perceived as doing the right level of work when the economy sucks, not that davis polk does anything specifically wrong

It's not just "when the economy sucks." People are pushed out on the regular.

You either quit, make partner, or have the meeting this guy described.

Most of the time nobody else will even know it went down. They give you 3 months (“And generally we find it’s best to accomplish this within a 90 day timeframe.”) and they find a new job. They leave just the same as the guy who really wanted to leave.

CR. Very understated point on TLS - even out of the recession chances are you are still going to get the talk and be forced to leave biglaw on someone else's terms. Every firm does it, and few people see it coming. In good times the timeframe might be marginally more stretched out (you'll get a pre-talk talk at your review 3 months before getting the talk instead of just the talk on a random day) but it's all the same in the end.

[itbdvorm]

wait so do i avoid DPW or not wats the moral of the story

no. this isn't a no offer bullshit scenario. the moral of the story is that any firm will ask a third/fourth year associate to leave who isn't perceived as doing the right level of work when the economy sucks, not that davis polk does anything specifically wrong

It's not just "when the economy sucks." People are pushed out on the regular.

You either quit, make partner, or have the meeting this guy described.

Most of the time nobody else will even know it went down. They give you 3 months (“And generally we find it’s best to accomplish this within a 90 day timeframe.”) and they find a new job. They leave just the same as the guy who really wanted to leave.

CR. Very understated point on TLS - even out of the recession chances are you are still going to get the talk and be forced to leave biglaw on someone else's terms. Every firm does it, and few people see it coming. In good times the timeframe might be marginally more stretched out (you'll get a pre-talk talk at your review 3 months before getting the talk instead of just the talk on a random day) but it's all the same in the end.

So this is not as right as people are saying.

The reality is that the better the economy, the lesser quality that is tolerated.

There are mid-level associates at my firm right now that would have been asked to leave if we had better options. But we don't, because the mid-levels were decimated in 2008-2010. So they are in good shape (at least for now) even though they have zero chance at partner.

If you are "not good" you will be pushed out. But if you are tolerable or better (justifying your salary, no major mistakes, etc.) you can last for a long time in this job. A "decent" mid-level / senior associate is still pretty valuable these days

[legends159]

Dude a "decent" mid-level/senior is saying a lot. Their work product and skills are on par with everyone else - they probably just haven't played the office politics as well or don't have the connections to land the big clients. If you're a mid-level/senior at one of these firms and you can't get the job done right you won't have a job because that means someone else, i.e., the partner, is picking up the slack. Doing a good enough job and doing a spectacular job is a really fine line that goes unnoticed most of the time.

Much easier to suck as a junior than as a mid-level/senior where there isn't anyone else above you to pick up the slack besides the partner.

[Desert Fox]

[krads153]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

[legends159]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

People think they can make partner; or they need the pay - i.e., got the mortgage, plus kids in private schools, etc. - so they can't afford to take a pay cut. Being of-counsel is a really good consolation prize, all things considered.

[krads153]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

People think they can make partner; or they need the pay - i.e., got the mortgage, plus kids in private schools, etc. - so they can't afford to take a pay cut. Being of-counsel is a really good consolation prize, all things considered.

I think that of counsel is super hard to get these days, too.

I feel sympathy for people with kids and a mortgage in biglaw in a city. It seems like a terrible way to live. This job is stressful enough without having all these burdens and obligations. Not to mention, it's a temporary job for most, so you can be fired at any time (a bigger threat than most jobs) and your whole family would be screwed.

[84651846190]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

People think they can make partner; or they need the pay - i.e., got the mortgage, plus kids in private schools, etc. - so they can't afford to take a pay cut. Being of-counsel is a really good consolation prize, all things considered.

I think that of counsel is super hard to get these days, too.

I feel sympathy for people with kids and a mortgage in biglaw in a city. It seems like a terrible way to live. This job is stressful enough without having all these burdens and obligations. Not to mention, it's a temporary job for most, so you can be fired at any time (a bigger threat than most jobs) and your whole family would be screwed.

Should have busted my ass to get into medical school. FML

[krads153]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

People think they can make partner; or they need the pay - i.e., got the mortgage, plus kids in private schools, etc. - so they can't afford to take a pay cut. Being of-counsel is a really good consolation prize, all things considered.

I think that of counsel is super hard to get these days, too.

I feel sympathy for people with kids and a mortgage in biglaw in a city. It seems like a terrible way to live. This job is stressful enough without having all these burdens and obligations. Not to mention, it's a temporary job for most, so you can be fired at any time (a bigger threat than most jobs) and your whole family would be screwed.

Should have busted my ass to get into medical school. FML

You can still do that if you want. lol. Two people I graduated law school with (one worked in biglaw for awhile) are now in medical school. One of them got into like 12 medical schools. I think his med school application cycle went better than his law school application cycle. He also got a perfect score on the verbal section of the MCAT. I think he had a 169/170 LSAT and did comparatively better on the MCAT, in part because the verbal portion on the MCAT was easier than the LSAT and going through law school probably helped.

[jbagelboy]

Also, don't you get less marketable after 5 years? Why would anyone want to stay longer than 5 years if you don't have a chance at partner?

There is super high attrition in biglaw. I think at the junior levels it's 90%+ voluntary and at midlevel range, maybe 75% voluntary. A decent number quit for no job though, to figure out their next move in life.

People think they can make partner; or they need the pay - i.e., got the mortgage, plus kids in private schools, etc. - so they can't afford to take a pay cut. Being of-counsel is a really good consolation prize, all things considered.

I think that of counsel is super hard to get these days, too.

I feel sympathy for people with kids and a mortgage in biglaw in a city. It seems like a terrible way to live. This job is stressful enough without having all these burdens and obligations. Not to mention, it's a temporary job for most, so you can be fired at any time (a bigger threat than most jobs) and your whole family would be screwed.

Should have busted my ass to get into medical school. FML

You can still do that if you want. lol. Two people I graduated law school with (one worked in biglaw for awhile) are now in medical school. One of them got into like 12 medical schools. I think his med school application cycle went better than his law school application cycle. He also got a perfect score on the verbal section of the MCAT. I think he had a 169/170 LSAT and did comparatively better on the MCAT because the verbal portion on the MCAT was easier than the LSAT and going through law school probably helped.

you'd be like 43 by the time you could practice medicine

not to mention you can't lose another $300K and seven years opportunity cost with a family

[84651846190]

Wife would divorce me for sure if I tried for med school at my age with two kids. I basically ruined my life by going to law school, even though most current law students would look at my career path and consider me a success. The reality of the matter is that law school is a good idea for AT MOST 10% or so of people who actually go (and almost all of them have no kids yet). If you already have kids and go to law school, odds are extremely high that you are making a bad choice.

[krads153]

Wife would divorce me for sure if I tried for med school at my age with two kids. I basically ruined my life by going to law school, even though most current law students would look at my career path and consider me a success. The reality of the matter is that law school is a good idea for AT MOST 10% or so of people who actually go (and almost all of them have no kids yet).

Yeah, the 10% being ones whose parents foot the bill, can treat a law degree as a luxury good and who never need to work for money because their parents have money. lol.

Personal opinion, but I don't think it's ever "too late" to go to med school. People can work until they die. You'd have a good 30 years to practice. But if you're taking out debt and/or have to support a family, then it makes it very hard. I think it'd be reasonable going to med school in your 30s if you have a big scholly and don't have kids.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I don't know, I would absolutely hate to try to pull off the all-nighters of residency or whatever it is even in my 30s compared to in my 20s. You can choose not to do biglaw and avoid those hours, but you can't avoid them in medicine. They just get harder as you get older.

Also medical training is so lonnnnng. Starting over in your thirties to train for so long would suck (3 years of law school is nothing).

Not saying anyone in their 30s can't/shouldn't go to med school, but I do think it would be a much tougher road than law school.