Top Law Schools

For 3L hiring, it seems like firms hire for a particular department; how does one go about finding out which departments need people?

I suppose you could call recruiting and ask. In my experience last year, though, the large firms didn't necessarily advertise that they were recruiting 3Ls at all. Anecdotally, it seemed as though there were a lot of firms looking for lit, just based on the response I received. Really, your best bet is just to mail as many firms as possible, choose one side or the other based on your resume, and hope it shows up on someone's radar.

A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Here, I fixed that quote for you, since, you know, you don't HAVE to shit on people.

.

NotMyRealName09 wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Here, I fixed that quote for you, since, you know, you don't HAVE to shit on people.

+1

RodneyRuxin wrote:

NotMyRealName09 wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Here, I fixed that quote for you, since, you know, you don't HAVE to shit on people.

+1

But it's so much more fun that way.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

Not true--but it is a long shot. You do need the right credentials, though. A pretty big chunk of the V20 was interviewing 3Ls last year. Skadden, DPW, Cravath, STB, PW, Latham, Boies off the top of my head. Problem is, the firms that tend to hire 3Ls are usually the most grade conscious, so unless you had the grades to get in the door 2L or had a huge grade increase, you aren't going to have much luck. If you didn't get an offer from your SA, or didn't have an SA to begin with, your chances of a 3L offer in biglaw are basically zilch. First question in the door at the interviews, and often from recruiting before they even schedule an interview, is whether you received an offer.

NotMyRealName09 wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Here, I fixed that quote for you, since, you know, you don't HAVE to shit on people.

Just helping people manage expectations.

Like the poster above me said, if you had a 2L SA job and kept your grades up, you may have a chance. But there are usually very few openings for 3Ls nationwide. (I think the number has been under 100 for the entire country in some recent years.)

cold email an alum or two and try to get a convo going.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

This is not true in my personal experience with a V20.

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

This is not true in my personal experience with a V20.

I don't think firms *want* to hire 3Ls in the sense that they purposely plan to hire 3Ls, so my statement is accurate from an ex ante perspective. Sometimes they hire 3Ls, but it's usually because one or more of their former 2L SAs leave or business needs change.

In other news, I need to be castrated for using the words "ex ante" in an Internet forum.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

This is not true in my personal experience with a V20.

I don't think firms *want* to hire 3Ls in the sense that they purposely plan to hire 3Ls, so my statement is accurate from an ex ante perspective. Sometimes they hire 3Ls, but it's usually because one or more of their former 2L SAs leave or business needs change.

In other news, I need to be castrated for using the words "ex ante" in an Internet forum.

I agree with that. I would wager that those firms I mentioned were replacing clerks, which aligns with the observation in my first post that mentioned more firms seemed to be recruiting 3Ls for lit.

so if you had a summer SA and wanted to switch firms (assuming you got an offer and had a good reason to switch - i.e. switching markets), what are the chances if you had mediocre grades 1L and an increase, but still not the cravath 4.0 level gpa?

Anonymous User wrote:so if you had a summer SA and wanted to switch firms (assuming you got an offer and had a good reason to switch - i.e. switching markets), what are the chances if you had mediocre grades 1L and an increase, but still not the cravath 4.0 level gpa?

Generally your odds would not be great but it will depend mainly on the needs of the firms in your target market. In any case, if you really wanted to switch markets then you should try even if your chances are low.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:A lot of firms post openings on their websites. Sometimes you have to dig a bit to find them.

Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry.

This is not true in my personal experience with a V20.

I don't think firms *want* to hire 3Ls in the sense that they purposely plan to hire 3Ls, so my statement is accurate from an ex ante perspective. Sometimes they hire 3Ls, but it's usually because one or more of their former 2L SAs leave or business needs change.

In other news, I need to be castrated for using the words "ex ante" in an Internet forum.

Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

Anonymous User wrote:Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

Nobody is saying it's rational (though there are justifications for it), but biglaw firms by and large prefer to hire their associates through the 2L fall hiring process.

bk1 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

Nobody is saying it's rational (though there are justifications for it), but biglaw firms by and large prefer to hire their associates through the 2L fall hiring process.

Where did I say that biglaw firms do not prefer to hire their associates through 2L fall hiring? I was addressing the blanket statement made earlier.

He went from "Nobody wants to hire 3Ls, though. Sorry." to they don't "purposely" hire 3Ls. So now it is they "prefer" hiring 2Ls.

It is obvious that 2L hiring is by far the main way big firms hire associates. I would need a learning disability to not understand this point. My point is that SOME firms actually plan to interview and sometimes hire 3Ls for whatever reason. The number may be small and restricted to top firms in NYC with huge classes. But there are, and this is undisputable, a number of firms that regularly interview 3Ls.

I was responding to: "Why wouldn't they want to a hire 3L when you can get a first year without paying them for an SA?" Because firms generally would prefer to have them as an SA. I agree that his backtracking may have been a bit overboard since there likely are some firms who intend to hire 3Ls, probably to poach who they perceive to be top candidates from other firms.

bk1 wrote:I was responding to: "Why wouldn't they want to a hire 3L when you can get a first year without paying them for an SA?" Because firms generally would prefer to have them as an SA. I agree that his backtracking may have been a bit overboard since there likely are some firms who intend to hire 3Ls, probably to poach who they perceive to be top candidates from other firms.

To be fair - I didn't say "Why wouldn't they want to a hire 3L when you can get a first year without paying them for an SA?"
I was addressing the question of why they wouldn't want to hire 3Ls with a plausible reason as to why. There is a difference. Your inversion of my statement makes it seem as though my view is that there are no reasons to hire a 2Ls.

Anyway, there is nothing to really argue about here. There are some firms that interview 3Ls. Vast majority of firms don't. If you didn't have the creds to get hired as a 2L, you probably won't as a 3L.

Anonymous User wrote: Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

This is your personal experience that V20s do 3L hiring? All sorts of things go into rejection letters, and not all of them are true or meaningful. If they're really interested in hiring you after graduation, why didn't they just give you an offer to work there after graduation?

dead head wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

This is your personal experience that V20s do 3L hiring? All sorts of things go into rejection letters, and not all of them are true or meaningful. If they're really interested in hiring you after graduation, why didn't they just give you an offer to work there after graduation?

Putting your objection to my anecdote aside for a moment - are you disputing that V20s hire 3Ls? My experience also includes speaking with students at my school how have switched firms after 2L summer. What is your point?

Anyway, they offered to interview me again in the fall. All sorts of things go into rejection letters. Most letters do not invite people back to interview again. I'm not hanging onto this promise for a job. I have a summer position at a peer firm. This really isn't about how "true or meaningful" their offer was. I presented it as an example. Your objection misses the point. Why would they plan to interview 3Ls if they didn't plan to hire some?

Anonymous User wrote:

dead head wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

This is your personal experience that V20s do 3L hiring? All sorts of things go into rejection letters, and not all of them are true or meaningful. If they're really interested in hiring you after graduation, why didn't they just give you an offer to work there after graduation?

Putting your objection to my anecdote aside for a moment - are you disputing that V20s hire 3Ls? My experience also includes speaking with students at my school how have switched firms after 2L summer. What is your point?

Anyway, they offered to interview me again in the fall. All sorts of things go into rejection letters. Most letters do not invite people back to interview again. I'm not hanging onto this promise for a job. I have a summer position at a peer firm. This really isn't about how "true or meaningful" their offer was. I presented it as an example. Your objection misses the point. Why would they plan to interview 3Ls if they didn't plan to hire some?

For someone who gets all riled up when others (reasonably) impute statements to you, you are certainly putting a lot of words in mine.

I don't dispute that firms hire 3Ls and that most of the biglaw firms that hire 3Ls are v20. That doesn't make it any less ridiculous for you to spin a throwaway line from your rejection letter as your personal experience that firms plan on hiring 3Ls. Your shitty reasoning is my point.

And why would they plan to interview 3Ls if they didn't plan to hire some? There are lots of possible reasons: being open to superstar candidates looking to change firms, even if they aren't really looking to hire anyone if they aren't wowed; keeping up appearances, just as lots of firms interviewed at lots of schools they had no intention of hiring anyone from during the recession; recognizing that their entry-level hiring may need to be more responsive than the two-years the traditional model requires;. These are all possible reasons why they may typically interview 3Ls even if they don't plan on hiring any, especially since these interviews can be combined with regular OCI.

One thing that firms don't do is plan on hiring small summer classes and then using 3L recruiting to making up their larger planned first-year intake. This v20 firm that rejected you nicely isn't planning on hiring 80 summers and then planning on picking up another 20 3Ls to to make up it's targeted first-year class of 100 new associates. They hire just as many summers (or maybe a few more) as they think they'll need to start working in two years.

Hi everyone,
OP here.
I was just wondering because I was fielding various V20 offers after OCI. I had no corporate/finance experience, so I just picked the one who's best practice group sounded sexiest. After 2L, I realize that I'd like to practice in a different department than the said sexy department. I was just wondering what my chances are at switching to a different firm where their strengths lie more with my interests. Haven't gotten grades back for this semester yet, but T14, top 30% so far, LR.
Anyways, thanks for all of your responses. Although, I'm still not really sure how I find out. I guess just shoot them my resume and transcript and see if I get any bites, and hope they're hiring for the department I want to work in?

dead head wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

dead head wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Why wouldn't they? They get to hire a first year without having to pay them 30k over the summer.

Anyway, again in my personal experience with a V20 -- after rejecting me after a callback they told me (in writing) that they would be very interested in employment after graduation--in other words interview as a 3L. Does this meet your definition of "purposely plan to hire 3Ls"? (Also I think the word you are looking for is purposefully)

This is your personal experience that V20s do 3L hiring? All sorts of things go into rejection letters, and not all of them are true or meaningful. If they're really interested in hiring you after graduation, why didn't they just give you an offer to work there after graduation?

Putting your objection to my anecdote aside for a moment - are you disputing that V20s hire 3Ls? My experience also includes speaking with students at my school how have switched firms after 2L summer. What is your point?

Anyway, they offered to interview me again in the fall. All sorts of things go into rejection letters. Most letters do not invite people back to interview again. I'm not hanging onto this promise for a job. I have a summer position at a peer firm. This really isn't about how "true or meaningful" their offer was. I presented it as an example. Your objection misses the point. Why would they plan to interview 3Ls if they didn't plan to hire some?

For someone who gets all riled up when others (reasonably) impute statements to you, you are certainly putting a lot of words in mine.

I don't dispute that firms hire 3Ls and that most of the biglaw firms that hire 3Ls are v20. That doesn't make it any less ridiculous for you to spin a throwaway line from your rejection letter as your personal experience that firms plan on hiring 3Ls. Your shitty reasoning is my point.

And why would they plan to interview 3Ls if they didn't plan to hire some? There are lots of possible reasons: being open to superstar candidates looking to change firms, even if they aren't really looking to hire anyone if they aren't wowed; keeping up appearances, just as lots of firms interviewed at lots of schools they had no intention of hiring anyone from during the recession; recognizing that their entry-level hiring may need to be more responsive than the two-years the traditional model requires;. These are all possible reasons why they may typically interview 3Ls even if they don't plan on hiring any, especially since these interviews can be combined with regular OCI.

One thing that firms don't do is plan on hiring small summer classes and then using 3L recruiting to making up their larger planned first-year intake. This v20 firm that rejected you nicely isn't planning on hiring 80 summers and then planning on picking up another 20 3Ls to to make up it's targeted first-year class of 100 new associates. They hire just as many summers (or maybe a few more) as they think they'll need to start working in two years.

EDIT: Actually - I'll procrastinate a bit longer.

You like to set up arguments that I've made in your imagination and then confidently strike them down-- "One thing that firms don't do is plan on hiring small summer classes and then using 3L recruiting to making up their larger planned first-year intake. This v20 firm that rejected you nicely isn't planning on hiring 80 summers and then planning on picking up another 20 3Ls to to make up it's targeted first-year class of 100 new associates. "

I don't understand what you are arguing with regards to my personal anecdote. It was an EXAMPLE of 3L interviewing. I'm not spinning anything.

Good luck with the job hunt! I'm sure with your knowledge of the hiring process you'll do well.