Firms to Avoid Forum

[run26.2]

At least from a large Texas firm, this is not quite accurate. In a recent year, the recruiting committee made no-offer recommendations on 2 HYS summers (same school). They were told to choose one because we weren't going to go back to that school having no-offered 2 of their students (there were multiple other summers from that school that were given offers, so it wasn't a case of going 0 for 2).

Fair enough. I had not see or heard of this before. This scenario seems more probable than a tie-breaker between otherwise equal students at different schools.

[Dafaq]

At the risk of seeming too gunnerish…. what I am talking about are SAs who are literally tied. Not the superstar SA whose been staffed on cases or those SAs who always have to amend their work. I am talking about an associate or partner who walks into the SA bullpen and would gladly hand his/her assignment to any of those SAs. These are the SAs in question here when it comes to delivering the bad news. Short of a coin flip something has to break the tie. Possibly schools (because of the potential backlash)?

[09042014]

That logic makes sense. However, in cases where there are +10 SAs my assumption is 1 or 2 are superstars and 1 or 2 are underachievers. The rest are basically tied. I believe that the school brand might play a deciding role in breaking the ties. Maybe there is someone ITT with experience that can shed some light on this possibility.

Multimillionare partners aren't impressed someone went to Harvard. It's a non factor unless you happen to be an alumni of the same school as the person who is making the call.

[Sgtpeppernyc]

To be honest, I find offer rates that are high but less than 100% to be a positive, rather than a negative. While it's all well and good that DPW boasts a 100% offer rate, I've encountered enough shitbirds to know that there have to be people that aren't worthy to work there. When a firm only gives out 95% offers, I at least know that they've deliberated about everyone and made sure to only bring in quality people. And, while I'm not the next Martin Lipton, I'm at least confident that I'm not enough of an ass clown to be in the 5% who didn't get the offer.

Thought I would come back and explain this in a little more depth.

I went through the process last summer, and my firm no-offered a small handful. I also talked to friends who are associates at their firms as well as current law students who were no-offered in classes where everyone else got an offer.

There are certain basics to any job. Do the work you're assigned to the best of your ability and on time. Treat everyone around you with respect. Come into work on time. Don't get so drunk that literally everyone is talking about it the next day. The "shitbirds" I talked about did these things.

When you summer at a law firm, everyone knows you don't really know what you're doing. And that's fine; firms universally lose money on summer associates because you simply can't expect a law student to pump out exceptional work product. The people who get no-offered in an otherwise strong economy at an otherwise strong law firm are often people who failed to obey the basic tenets of professionalism. Coming in late regularly, handing in work late, handing in typo-laden work product. Being generally obnoxious or rude to others (including staff). Getting so drunk that you're a spectacle to everyone around you.

My point was that these people come into law firms with shocking frequency; some are just socially inept, some are entitled, and some just never learned how to be a professional. Everyone has a story like this. I have no qualms with these people being no-offered, because getting an offer to make $160,000 is a privilege. It just doesn't make business sense to bring on someone who may embarrass you in front of a client (or a judge), or consistently hands in sloppy work product, when you can save the $160,000 and hire another summer next year or hire a lateral that has already proven him / herself.

I can't comment on whether firms also no-offer because they brought in too many people (and I'm sure they have), but in my experience a small no-offer rate is a result of the above.

[Blindmelon]

My point was that these people come into law firms with shocking frequency; some are just socially inept, some are entitled, and some just never learned how to be a professional. Everyone has a story like this. I have no qualms with these people being no-offered, because getting an offer to make $160,000 is a privilege. It just doesn't make business sense to bring on someone who may embarrass you in front of a client (or a judge), or consistently hands in sloppy work product, when you can save the $160,000 and hire another summer next year or hire a lateral that has already proven him / herself.

I lost you there. Work a few years and this thought will go away.

[Sgtpeppernyc]

My point was that these people come into law firms with shocking frequency; some are just socially inept, some are entitled, and some just never learned how to be a professional. Everyone has a story like this. I have no qualms with these people being no-offered, because getting an offer to make $160,000 is a privilege. It just doesn't make business sense to bring on someone who may embarrass you in front of a client (or a judge), or consistently hands in sloppy work product, when you can save the $160,000 and hire another summer next year or hire a lateral that has already proven him / herself.

I lost you there. Work a few years and this thought will go away.

Probably. But in the scheme of things, assuming you went straight through, you're in the top 2% of income earners by age 25 and assuming you stay, the top 1% a few years after that. Not saying that it's an enviable position or that the system is properly set up (the law school system is fucked), but I think it's ridiculous to treat a firm job as a given.

[PepperJack]

Surprised no one has mentioned Dechert. At the beginning of summer 2012 it told its classes in two offices (I think) that its offer acceptance rates had been higher than in previous years and they therefore had a larger summer class than planned; consequently, they would no offer about 10% of the summer class. At my school alone, two people were no-offered as a result. The high acceptance rate would have been known at least by mid-fall 2011, and they could have told their last few accepting applicants to allow them to take any secondary offers. Instead they let the summer associates play hunger games, hoping they wouldn't be considered bottom 10%.

I want to stress that I do not have first-hand knowledge of this, as I did not summer at Dechert, but I heard this from people who actually got offers, so I have no reason to doubt it.

Edited for accuracy.

I heard this as well. However I was told by people who summered there that the 2013 summer class got 100% offers (at least in NYC) because the firm drastically cut the size of it's summer class. While Dechert isn't the most financially healthy firm, it seems to have taken the right steps to make sure it doesn't screw over future summer classes.

I don't know why you're saying it's not financially healthy. It seems to be growing, particularly the NYC office. It's also consistently making a profit.

[Blindmelon]

Surprised no one has mentioned Dechert. At the beginning of summer 2012 it told its classes in two offices (I think) that its offer acceptance rates had been higher than in previous years and they therefore had a larger summer class than planned; consequently, they would no offer about 10% of the summer class. At my school alone, two people were no-offered as a result. The high acceptance rate would have been known at least by mid-fall 2011, and they could have told their last few accepting applicants to allow them to take any secondary offers. Instead they let the summer associates play hunger games, hoping they wouldn't be considered bottom 10%.

I want to stress that I do not have first-hand knowledge of this, as I did not summer at Dechert, but I heard this from people who actually got offers, so I have no reason to doubt it.

Edited for accuracy.

I heard this as well. However I was told by people who summered there that the 2013 summer class got 100% offers (at least in NYC) because the firm drastically cut the size of it's summer class. While Dechert isn't the most financially healthy firm, it seems to have taken the right steps to make sure it doesn't screw over future summer classes.

I don't know why you're saying it's not financially healthy. It seems to be growing, particularly the NYC office. It's also consistently making a profit.

Yea, I don't get where those Dechert thoughts are coming from. I have not seen any indications that they are not performing well. Not offering 10% of a summer class isn't that unheard of. Also, they shipped a few people between offices so they could give out more offers (happened to a classmate).

[PepperJack]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

[Lincoln]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

Which is totally irrelevant if you end up being one of the ones who get no-offered (and to pretty much everyone except partners).

[Anonymous User]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

Which is totally irrelevant if you end up being one of the ones who get no-offered (and to pretty much everyone except partners).

I disagree. When a department isn't pulling its weight in any business in any industry, it is in danger of getting cut. The most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't. There's no such thing as the rainmaking first year.

[Dredd_2017]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

Which is totally irrelevant if you end up being one of the ones who get no-offered (and to pretty much everyone except partners).

I disagree. When a department isn't pulling its weight in any business in any industry, it is in danger of getting cut. The most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't. There's no such thing as the rainmaking first year.

Lincoln is absolutely correct that a firms finances are irrelevant to the summer who gets no-offered. You're saying that if a 1L is choosing between several firms and using summer hiring rates exclusively as a barometer of firm finances he/she may get the wrong picture, which sounds reasonable. Yet all things being equal the firm with the 100% offer rate is still vastly superior to the firm doing great financially with a 70% offer rate for obvious reasons, unless it looks like firm A is about to implode.

You even state that the "most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't," which seems far more likely to pertain to a no-offer than an entire department of a firm being cut from everything I've read on TLS.

[Anonymous User]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

Which is totally irrelevant if you end up being one of the ones who get no-offered (and to pretty much everyone except partners).

I disagree. When a department isn't pulling its weight in any business in any industry, it is in danger of getting cut. The most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't. There's no such thing as the rainmaking first year.

Lincoln is absolutely correct that a firms finances are irrelevant to the summer who gets no-offered. You're saying that if a 1L is choosing between several firms and using summer hiring rates exclusively as a barometer of firm finances he/she may get the wrong picture, which sounds reasonable. Yet all things being equal the firm with the 100% offer rate is still vastly superior to the firm doing great financially with a 70% offer rate for obvious reasons, unless it looks like firm A is about to implode.

You even state that the "most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't," which seems far more likely to pertain to a no-offer than an entire department of a firm being cut from everything I've read on TLS.

delete/

[PepperJack]

The assumption is that no offering = not doing well. Firms have different strategies. Dechert has a reputation for being very bottom lined, which is how they are increasingly making profits in this economy. Some firms offer 100% the class because all the other firms in their band offer 100%. If you look at Philly for instance, most of the firms are ~50-70% offers. None of them are really struggling. For summers, yeah, it's scarier if a place isn't 100%. However, there's no reason to assume that your practice group might all get laid off. The firm is doing very well financially.

Which is totally irrelevant if you end up being one of the ones who get no-offered (and to pretty much everyone except partners).

I disagree. When a department isn't pulling its weight in any business in any industry, it is in danger of getting cut. The most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't. There's no such thing as the rainmaking first year.

Lincoln is absolutely correct that a firms finances are irrelevant to the summer who gets no-offered. You're saying that if a 1L is choosing between several firms and using summer hiring rates exclusively as a barometer of firm finances he/she may get the wrong picture, which sounds reasonable. Yet all things being equal the firm with the 100% offer rate is still vastly superior to the firm doing great financially with a 70% offer rate for obvious reasons, unless it looks like firm A is about to implode.

You even state that the "most frightening aspect for many is not what they can control, but what they can't," which seems far more likely to pertain to a no-offer than an entire department of a firm being cut from everything I've read on TLS.

For the 99% for whom its their 2L, I think you're picking a firm as a baseline for your career. You're obviously only gonna be there for a few years statistically speaking, but if most summers are if f/t offer -> accept "loyal" personalities -> your department turning a profit is absolutely important. I'm admittedly not at all an expert in legal hiring, but in baseball if someone is the assistant to the assistant of the GM and the team goes 60-102 and the whole front office is fired, 9 times out of 10 that bro(ette) is done.