Top Law Schools

Shoot

group? what is best/worst about being at each phase of associate (Junior, mid, senior)?

4LTsPointingNorth wrote:group? what is best/worst about being at each phase of associate (Junior, mid, senior)?

Lit. The worst part of being a junior associate is never really knowing if you are doing the right thing on your work, and always being the one responsible for the first draft of everything. As you get more senior, the worst part is being responsible for the deliverables and the case more generally. That part can be a lot of pressure and is something juniors don't really have to worry about.

Do you have any information regarding hiring? Such as what does it really mean if you're still under review a few weeka after the CB? Or anything you feel is useful?

Anonymous User wrote:Do you have any information regarding hiring? Such as what does it really mean if you're still under review a few weeka after the CB? Or anything you feel is useful?

Congrats on the CB. Every firm does hiring a little differently, so it's hard to say for sure. But, my guess is one of two possibilities -- (1) the hiring committee has yet to meet and/or extend offers to people. You'd be amazed at how inefficient the administrative side of firms can be. Or, (2) they have extended offers to a group of people, and are waiting to hear back from them before making decisions on others.

I can't hurt to email one of the hiring people you met with to reiterate your interest in the firm and check and see if there is any other information you can provide (mostly as an excuse to learn more about the status of your app).

century123 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Do you have any information regarding hiring? Such as what does it really mean if you're still under review a few weeka after the CB? Or anything you feel is useful?

Congrats on the CB. Every firm does hiring a little differently, so it's hard to say for sure. But, my guess is one of two possibilities -- (1) the hiring committee has yet to meet and/or extend offers to people. You'd be amazed at how inefficient the administrative side of firms can be. Or, (2) they have extended offers to a group of people, and are waiting to hear back from them before making decisions on others.

I can't hurt to email one of the hiring people you met with to reiterate your interest in the firm and check and see if there is any other information you can provide (mostly as an excuse to learn more about the status of your app).

Thank you for the info. If the latter is correct, in your opinion, does that usually mean you're going to get an offer if enough people reject theirs?

Are you out to make partner? If not, what are you thinking of as your next step?

What do you like to do in your spare time?

About to start in the corporate department in a few weeks. Any tips on how to survive the first year and perform well?

Anonymous User wrote:

century123 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Do you have any information regarding hiring? Such as what does it really mean if you're still under review a few weeka after the CB? Or anything you feel is useful?

Congrats on the CB. Every firm does hiring a little differently, so it's hard to say for sure. But, my guess is one of two possibilities -- (1) the hiring committee has yet to meet and/or extend offers to people. You'd be amazed at how inefficient the administrative side of firms can be. Or, (2) they have extended offers to a group of people, and are waiting to hear back from them before making decisions on others.

I can't hurt to email one of the hiring people you met with to reiterate your interest in the firm and check and see if there is any other information you can provide (mostly as an excuse to learn more about the status of your app).

Thank you for the info. If the latter is correct, in your opinion, does that usually mean you're going to get an offer if enough people reject theirs?

That would be my guess, but I'm just speculating at this point

Anonymous User wrote:About to start in the corporate department in a few weeks. Any tips on how to survive the first year and perform well?

I haven't done much corporate work, but a few more general tips:

(1) Make sure everything you do is ready to be passed up the chain by the person you are sending it to. It saves people time, and junior associates who can do that are great. There will inevitably be things you couldn't figure out, or weren't sure about. Flag all of those things in the cover email. (2) If someone sends you an assignment, it is good practice to reply to let the person know you are doing it. If it is a longer assignment, make a point of checking in when you have made some progress to make sure you aren't off track. (3) Make sure the details are right. In lit practice, that's making sure all of your citations are correct, no grammar issues, etc. That sort of thing is a signal that people use to judge the quality of work (fairly or unfairly).

deepseapartners wrote:Are you out to make partner? If not, what are you thinking of as your next step?

What do you like to do in your spare time?

Probably not. I'm not opposed to making partner, but it is an increasingly difficult route at firms. Firms are more inclined to let senior people hang around in a non-partner status, which isn't as appealing. Probably in-house is a next step.

When is the best time to look for an in-house position? As a junior associate or is it better to wait till you are a senior associate?

stressed wrote:When is the best time to look for an in-house position? As a junior associate or is it better to wait till you are a senior associate?

In general, it is easier to switch firms as a junior or mid-level, and gets harder as one gets more senior. In-house on the other hand, is easier when someone is more senior. Some big companies hire junior attorneys, but most companies want in-house lawyers to have 5-10 years experience.

What obstacles, if any, do you feel you'll have going in house as a litigation attorney rather than in a corporate/transactional attorney?

What market are you working in, and are you happy that you chose your market? When you were choosing a firm did you go for prestige alone or was fit a huge concern? (and if you picked your firm based on fit, do you still actually like the people you work with?)

Anonymous User wrote:What market are you working in, and are you happy that you chose your market? When you were choosing a firm did you go for prestige alone or was fit a huge concern? (and if you picked your firm based on fit, do you still actually like the people you work with?)

I'm in a non-NYC major market. I've been happy with my choice. My general impression is that the pace and atmosphere is generally more grueling in NYC. I think the hours I work are comparable to any NYC firm, but the general attitude towards associates is much more humane. For example, people tend to leave in time for dinner and then get back online later in the evening if need be.

My impression of my firm when I was interviewing was that the people are pretty nice, and that has been borne out. When you are working a lot of hours and under pressure, generally liking the people you work with makes a big difference. I was fortunate that I didn't need to sacrifice much firm prestige for fit. In general, I think the prestige/reputation of the firm is an very important factor when choosing a firm. That said, a few slots on the vault ranking are not worth working somewhere that you think you'll be unhappy at.

Given that 2,000 hours are necessary for the bonus, once you throw in a vacation, I don’t see a way around a constant +60-hour work week. Your thoughts….

Anonymous User wrote:Given that 2,000 hours are necessary for the bonus, once you throw in a vacation, I don’t see a way around a constant +60-hour work week. Your thoughts….

2,000 hours over 48 weeks is about 42 hours a week (rounding up). I know that there are firms where juniors end up doing a lot of non-billable work but an additional 20 hours of non-billable time per week sounds excessive.

cavalier1138 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Given that 2,000 hours are necessary for the bonus, once you throw in a vacation, I don’t see a way around a constant +60-hour work week. Your thoughts….

2,000 hours over 48 weeks is about 42 hours a week (rounding up). I know that there are firms where juniors end up doing a lot of non-billable work but an additional 20 hours of non-billable time per week sounds excessive.

At my NYC firm, in the corporate group at least, you will have at least 4 weeks a year where you are absolutely dead. Like billing 5 hours a week dead. So in this hypo you are really billing ~2,000 hours over 44 weeks, which is closer to 45 hours a week. With time for lunch, coffee and bathroom breaks, chewing the fat with people, waiting on turns of documents, etc. you could get to 55+ a week every week. Of course with the ebbs and flows of corporate you would probably work more than 60 or less than 50 most weeks.

notgreat wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Given that 2,000 hours are necessary for the bonus, once you throw in a vacation, I don’t see a way around a constant +60-hour work week. Your thoughts….

2,000 hours over 48 weeks is about 42 hours a week (rounding up). I know that there are firms where juniors end up doing a lot of non-billable work but an additional 20 hours of non-billable time per week sounds excessive.

At my NYC firm, in the corporate group at least, you will have at least 4 weeks a year where you are absolutely dead. Like billing 5 hours a week dead. So in this hypo you are really billing ~2,000 hours over 44 weeks, which is closer to 45 hours a week. With time for lunch, coffee and bathroom breaks, chewing the fat with people, waiting on turns of documents, etc. you could get to 55+ a week every week. Of course with the ebbs and flows of corporate you would probably work more than 60 or less than 50 most weeks.

Agreed.

Then throw in general meetings and a wasted billing week for the occasional seminar trip. 60 hours is on the low end.

Anonymous User wrote:Given that 2,000 hours are necessary for the bonus, once you throw in a vacation, I don’t see a way around a constant +60-hour work week. Your thoughts….

I'm on pace for about 2100 hours this year, and have worked about 2000 hours over the last calendar year (as in a year from today) - 60+ hours has happened maybe six or seven times total? It's not that bad.

And if you have four or five weeks a year that are totally dead, I think we have found the weeks where you should take your vacation.