Barack Ferrazzano or Kirkland (Chicago) Forum

[Anonymous User]

My friend is deciding between the two (doesn’t have an account). Would it be dumb to turn down Kirkland for a small firm like Barack Ferrazzano. I personally never heard of Barack Ferrazzano, so I think it’s a no-brainer, but curious to see what others think.

[Anonymous User]

barack and it's not even close.

[Anonymous User]

There are reasons to choose either. Probably more reasons to turn down K&E than accept it, though.

[Anonymous User]

OP here: Isn’t pay at Kirkland going to be significantly higher?

[hoos89]

Their scale is compressed but it starts at $190k. Not sure your friend will last long enough at Kirkland for salary compression to matter.

http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/l ... y-overview

[Anonymous User]

Their scale is compressed but it starts at $190k. Not sure your friend will last long enough at Kirkland for salary compression to matter.

http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/l ... y-overview

Good to know. I thought Kirkland let people stay around for around 6 ish years if they were not incompetent. Maybe I was wrong

[Anonymous User]

Their scale is compressed but it starts at $190k. Not sure your friend will last long enough at Kirkland for salary compression to matter.

http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/l ... y-overview

Good to know. I thought Kirkland let people stay around for around 6 ish years if they were not incompetent. Maybe I was wrong

thats true of most big firms, yet most people don't make it past 4 years.

[hoos89]

Their scale is compressed but it starts at $190k. Not sure your friend will last long enough at Kirkland for salary compression to matter.

http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/l ... y-overview

Good to know. I thought Kirkland let people stay around for around 6 ish years if they were not incompetent. Maybe I was wrong

Most people who leave biglaw don't do it because they're pushed out. Kirkland has a reputation as a particularly demanding place to work, even as biglaw goes. Either option would be defensible.

[Anonymous User]

Their scale is compressed but it starts at $190k. Not sure your friend will last long enough at Kirkland for salary compression to matter.

http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/l ... y-overview

Good to know. I thought Kirkland let people stay around for around 6 ish years if they were not incompetent. Maybe I was wrong

Most people who leave biglaw don't do it because they're pushed out. Kirkland has a reputation as a particularly demanding place to work, even as biglaw goes. Either option would be defensible.

Fair. But is Barack a second-tier firm in Chicago? I see that it’s not vault ranked for Chicago

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know what a senior associate at the firm makes? Looks like most associates went to Northwestern and Michigan, so I’d assume it must be close to market, but wondering if anyone has any insight

[Anonymous User]

Fair. But is Barack a second-tier firm in Chicago? I see that it’s not vault ranked for Chicago

Depends what you mean by second tier. its not going to work on the big deals or big cases in all likelihood like the kind you'll see at kirkland/skadden/etc. if thats important to you (and it might be for legit reasons) and you really want to do that kind of work, than it might not be optimal. i don't know about the comp, but given that it's compressed the more senior you are the more drastic the pay difference between kirkland and barack ferrazzano.

On the other hand, it has a reputation that its a nice place to work where you get a responsibility early on, and on complex work. The hours are better too (according to the vault review). so people might want it because its a better work-life balance with only a moderate pay cut as you get senior (i believe they match 190k for first years)

[TatteredDignity]

Fair. But is Barack a second-tier firm in Chicago? I see that it’s not vault ranked for Chicago

Depends what you mean by second tier. its not going to work on the big deals or big cases in all likelihood like the kind you'll see at kirkland/skadden/etc. if thats important to you (and it might be for legit reasons) and you really want to do that kind of work, than it might not be optimal. i don't know about the comp, but given that it's compressed the more senior you are the more drastic the pay difference between kirkland and barack ferrazzano.

On the other hand, it has a reputation that its a nice place to work where you get a responsibility early on, and on complex work. The hours are better too (according to the vault review). so people might want it because its a better work-life balance with only a moderate pay cut as you get senior (i believe they match 190k for first years)

Casual dress code is a huge plus, too.

[Schotes]

Usually it is better to start at the top and then lateral. In Chicago the training at Kirkland, Sidley or Latham is recognized as first tier everywhere. Senior associate salaries are competitive between the top firms.

Choosing Barack is a limiting choice. A new attorney has no idea if that future limitation is important.

[Anonymous User]

Legit question: how do you pronounce Barack Ferrazzano? I just landed an interview and then realized I have no idea and can't find good information online.

[Anonymous User]

Legit question: how do you pronounce Barack Ferrazzano? I just landed an interview and then realized I have no idea and can't find good information online.

It’s like Bare-ek (like in heckle) and Ferrazzano is self-explanatory

[Anonymous User]

Usually it is better to start at the top and then lateral. In Chicago the training at Kirkland, Sidley or Latham is recognized as first tier everywhere. Senior associate salaries are competitive between the top firms.

Choosing Barack is a limiting choice. A new attorney has no idea if that future limitation is important.

Makes perfect sense. I read in vault that formal training is a little lacking at Barack Ferrazzano.

Obviously top firm salaries are lockstep o the new cravath scale. For a 6th year, for example, is Barack like 50k below market? I read on vault that bonuses are a lot less.

By limiting, do you mean the potential to lateral “up” to a Kirkland, Skadden, Latham? Or to go in-house?

My friend is trying to just stay at one firm for 3-4 years then leave and apparently most people at a Kirkland or Skadden (and definitely Latham) do not last past 2. Is that something one should consider?

[Anonymous User]

Legit question: how do you pronounce Barack Ferrazzano? I just landed an interview and then realized I have no idea and can't find good information online.

It’s like Bare-ek (like in heckle) and Ferrazzano is self-explanatory

Thanks man! Appreciate the other info in this thread too.

[Schotes]

Makes perfect sense. I read in vault that formal training is a little lacking at Barack Ferrazzano.

Obviously top firm salaries are lockstep o the new cravath scale. For a 6th year, for example, is Barack like 50k below market? I read on vault that bonuses are a lot less.

By limiting, do you mean the potential to lateral “up” to a Kirkland, Skadden, Latham? Or to go in-house?

My friend is trying to just stay at one firm for 3-4 years then leave and apparently most people at a Kirkland or Skadden (and definitely Latham) do not last past 2. Is that something one should consider?

For top students an important aspect of first jobs after law school is credentialing. Passing on a V10 for Barack is like choosing a T50 instead of Columbia because of a small scholarship offer at the lower ranked school. If Barack is near market the associate workload cannot be far off of Kirkland and similar biglaw. The choice between these firms is unlikely to be between hard and manageable.

Biglaw firms also have extensive alumni networks and will often help place associates in-house with a client.

To be clear, Barack may be better than Kirkland in a niche area. My point is not about a universal better firm. It's about credentials and training of a new lawyer. Usually there is only one chance at biglaw.

I know one student who will be a SA at Kirkland Chicago next year. If he is indicative of their typical hire it is going to be great group of nice, smart people.

[Anonymous User]

I think there is some misinformation on here. Barack Ferrazzano isn’t like run of the mill midsize firms and I know many people who choose it over a Kirkland or Sidley and I know people at the top firms in Chicago who got rejected by BFKN. From what I know (I know a couple of the associates), it is a great place to work (casual everyday is an example). Yes, the hours are still not great, but they seem to not have to work most weekends. And from my understanding the salary compression isn’t too bad.

If your goal is to go in-house, obviously it’s better to go to Kirkland (huge firm with huge network), but if the goal is to stay in a firm for a while, Barack hands down.

Also, to a comment above, my friend at Barack put out feelers when she considered lateraling and v10s didn’t have any problem giving her offers, so it is possible to trade up later on.

[hoos89]

For top students an important aspect of first jobs after law school is credentialing. Passing on a V10 for Barack is like choosing a T50 instead of Columbia because of a small scholarship offer at the lower ranked school.

I don't think this comparison is apt at all. Barack is not a T50 to Kirkland's Columbia. Barack is probably MORE selective than Kirkland for one...and don't really understand the small scholarship analogy considering that the money is going the other direction in this case. This is a far more complicated choice than T50 vs Columbia.

If Barack is near market the associate workload cannot be far off of Kirkland and similar biglaw. The choice between these firms is unlikely to be between hard and manageable.

There's a wide range of workloads among practice areas at the same office of the same firm. To suggest that the workload "can't" be far off is a bit of a leap.

To be clear, Barack may be better than Kirkland in a niche area. My point is not about a universal better firm. It's about credentials and training of a new lawyer. Usually there is only one chance at biglaw.

Definitely possible to go from Barack to biglaw.

I know one student who will be a SA at Kirkland Chicago next year. If he is indicative of their typical hire it is going to be great group of nice, smart people.

Are you trolling?

[Anonymous User]

For top students an important aspect of first jobs after law school is credentialing. Passing on a V10 for Barack is like choosing a T50 instead of Columbia because of a small scholarship offer at the lower ranked school. If Barack is near market the associate workload cannot be far off of Kirkland and similar biglaw. The choice between these firms is unlikely to be between hard and manageable.

Biglaw firms also have extensive alumni networks and will often help place associates in-house with a client.

To be clear, Barack may be better than Kirkland in a niche area. My point is not about a universal better firm. It's about credentials and training of a new lawyer. Usually there is only one chance at biglaw.

I know one student who will be a SA at Kirkland Chicago next year. If he is indicative of their typical hire it is going to be great group of nice, smart people.

Choosing a law firm out of OCI is not like choosing a law school and its not like this is the difference of 20 grand a year more in scholarship money or something. Kirkland is known as having brutal hours. If what the above poster said is true, then Barack Ferrazzano apparently has much more reasonable hours. Better hours means more time for yourself on weekends and evenings. Also, Barack isn't like some T50 school. The people that I knew during OCI that had CBs had pretty good grades and offers at Kirkland/Sidley. Its a tough firm to get because a lot of people want more reasonable hours and more responsibility and still make 200k+. It's a desirable spot for that reason.

There is likely something to be said about what name shows up on your resume, and Kirkland is obviously the big name in the city. If you're goal is to go in-house within 3-4 years, then you should probably chose Kirkland because it will likely give you a bigger breadth of options. If you want to stay at a firm for a while and get better substantive experience as an associate, then that's a reason to choose Barack. Barack has a great reputation, and given that and the credentials of the attorneys who seem to end up there, working at Barack Ferrazzano likely won't stop them from lateraling wherever in the city after a few years if thats something you have to do. Out of market is a different story, and leaving Chicago from Barack might be more difficult.

Barack and Kirkland are about as different as you can get between Chicago law firms that pay market. There are good reasons for choosing both that have already been talked about in this thread. Going to one does not preclude going to the other later down the line. Though getting to Barack later on might still be hard because they are so small and don't seem to hire a lot.

If your friend wants to go to the biggest name in the city, make top of market comp, work like crazy on big deals, and then exit to some company, go for Kirkland. If your friend wants to have a more manageable lifestyle, have way more responsibility on what are generally smaller deals and cases, and work at a place known for retaining folks for a while, then go to Barack. By the way if your friend is considering real-estate then she/he should chose Barack, since that's what they are known for.

[Schotes]

..........

Are you trolling?

You don't seem to understand the definition of trolling. If you are asking if I work for Kirkland or if I am somehow affiliated, the answer is no.

What you also don't understand is that the deal flow in Chicago at Kirkland, Sidley, and Latham is higher quality than at Barack and its peers.

A good "rule of thumb" for top students is to pick one of the highly rated vault firms headquartered in the city of choice. For transactional and Chicago that is Sidley or Kirkland.

Also, both Kirkland and Sidley have informal dress code. This policy would include dark jeans with a nice shirt, or an appropriate summer dress. Perhaps Barack has gone leading edge with t-shirts and cutoffs?

[Schotes]

For top students an important aspect of first jobs after law school is credentialing. Passing on a V10 for Barack is like choosing a T50 instead of Columbia because of a small scholarship offer at the lower ranked school. If Barack is near market the associate workload cannot be far off of Kirkland and similar biglaw. The choice between these firms is unlikely to be between hard and manageable.

Biglaw firms also have extensive alumni networks and will often help place associates in-house with a client.

To be clear, Barack may be better than Kirkland in a niche area. My point is not about a universal better firm. It's about credentials and training of a new lawyer. Usually there is only one chance at biglaw.

I know one student who will be a SA at Kirkland Chicago next year. If he is indicative of their typical hire it is going to be great group of nice, smart people.

Choosing a law firm out of OCI is not like choosing a law school and its not like this is the difference of 20 grand a year more in scholarship money or something. Kirkland is known as having brutal hours. If what the above poster said is true, then Barack Ferrazzano apparently has much more reasonable hours. Better hours means more time for yourself on weekends and evenings. Also, Barack isn't like some T50 school. The people that I knew during OCI that had CBs had pretty good grades and offers at Kirkland/Sidley. Its a tough firm to get because a lot of people want more reasonable hours and more responsibility and still make 200k+. It's a desirable spot for that reason.

There is likely something to be said about what name shows up on your resume, and Kirkland is obviously the big name in the city. If you're goal is to go in-house within 3-4 years, then you should probably chose Kirkland because it will likely give you a bigger breadth of options. If you want to stay at a firm for a while and get better substantive experience as an associate, then that's a reason to choose Barack. Barack has a great reputation, and given that and the credentials of the attorneys who seem to end up there, working at Barack Ferrazzano likely won't stop them from lateraling wherever in the city after a few years if thats something you have to do. Out of market is a different story, and leaving Chicago from Barack might be more difficult.

Barack and Kirkland are about as different as you can get between Chicago law firms that pay market. There are good reasons for choosing both that have already been talked about in this thread. Going to one does not preclude going to the other later down the line. Though getting to Barack later on might still be hard because they are so small and don't seem to hire a lot.

If your friend wants to go to the biggest name in the city, make top of market comp, work like crazy on big deals, and then exit to some company, go for Kirkland. If your friend wants to have a more manageable lifestyle, have way more responsibility on what are generally smaller deals and cases, and work at a place known for retaining folks for a while, then go to Barack. By the way if your friend is considering real-estate then she/he should chose Barack, since that's what they are known for.

A less that 2000 hour requirement(explicit or implicit like at Kirkland) for a Chicago firm paying Cravath is simply a mark of a firm in decline. Busy firms have a lot of work. Busy top firms provide the best training. Students interviewing for SA should not be trying to pick a firm for long term employment. Students don't know enough about themselves or the real world of work. The purpose of the first job is to get trained and to gain enough knowledge to establish long term goals.

[Anonymous User]

For top students an important aspect of first jobs after law school is credentialing. Passing on a V10 for Barack is like choosing a T50 instead of Columbia because of a small scholarship offer at the lower ranked school. If Barack is near market the associate workload cannot be far off of Kirkland and similar biglaw. The choice between these firms is unlikely to be between hard and manageable.

Biglaw firms also have extensive alumni networks and will often help place associates in-house with a client.

To be clear, Barack may be better than Kirkland in a niche area. My point is not about a universal better firm. It's about credentials and training of a new lawyer. Usually there is only one chance at biglaw.

I know one student who will be a SA at Kirkland Chicago next year. If he is indicative of their typical hire it is going to be great group of nice, smart people.

Choosing a law firm out of OCI is not like choosing a law school and its not like this is the difference of 20 grand a year more in scholarship money or something. Kirkland is known as having brutal hours. If what the above poster said is true, then Barack Ferrazzano apparently has much more reasonable hours. Better hours means more time for yourself on weekends and evenings. Also, Barack isn't like some T50 school. The people that I knew during OCI that had CBs had pretty good grades and offers at Kirkland/Sidley. Its a tough firm to get because a lot of people want more reasonable hours and more responsibility and still make 200k+. It's a desirable spot for that reason.

There is likely something to be said about what name shows up on your resume, and Kirkland is obviously the big name in the city. If you're goal is to go in-house within 3-4 years, then you should probably chose Kirkland because it will likely give you a bigger breadth of options. If you want to stay at a firm for a while and get better substantive experience as an associate, then that's a reason to choose Barack. Barack has a great reputation, and given that and the credentials of the attorneys who seem to end up there, working at Barack Ferrazzano likely won't stop them from lateraling wherever in the city after a few years if thats something you have to do. Out of market is a different story, and leaving Chicago from Barack might be more difficult.

Barack and Kirkland are about as different as you can get between Chicago law firms that pay market. There are good reasons for choosing both that have already been talked about in this thread. Going to one does not preclude going to the other later down the line. Though getting to Barack later on might still be hard because they are so small and don't seem to hire a lot.

If your friend wants to go to the biggest name in the city, make top of market comp, work like crazy on big deals, and then exit to some company, go for Kirkland. If your friend wants to have a more manageable lifestyle, have way more responsibility on what are generally smaller deals and cases, and work at a place known for retaining folks for a while, then go to Barack. By the way if your friend is considering real-estate then she/he should chose Barack, since that's what they are known for.

A less that 2000 hour requirement(explicit or implicit like at Kirkland) for a Chicago firm paying Cravath is simply a mark of a firm in decline. Busy firms have a lot of work. Busy top firms provide the best training. Students interviewing for SA should not be trying to pick a firm for long term employment. Students don't know enough about themselves or the real world of work. The purpose of the first job is to get trained and to gain enough knowledge to establish long term goals.

I know some people who have worked there. They have decent hours cuz of the kind of deals/clients they have generally don’t require round the clock fire drill type work and if a practice area grows they hire people to decrease the burden. Its not about the firm being busy or not. But you seem to know because your friend landed an SA offer at Kirkland this month, and are convinced there is no reason not to chose it.

Also, the dress code really is like t-shirts and shorts/jeans everyday.

[Anonymous User]

..........

Are you trolling?

You don't seem to understand the definition of trolling. If you are asking if I work for Kirkland or if I am somehow affiliated, the answer is no.

What you also don't understand is that the deal flow in Chicago at Kirkland, Sidley, and Latham is higher quality than at Barack and its peers.

A good "rule of thumb" for top students is to pick one of the highly rated vault firms headquartered in the city of choice. For transactional and Chicago that is Sidley or Kirkland.

Also, both Kirkland and Sidley have informal dress code. This policy would include dark jeans with a nice shirt, or an appropriate summer dress. Perhaps Barack has gone leading edge with t-shirts and cutoffs?

I work at one of the firms mentioned, and 2 things (and another thing you mentioned in a later post).

1) training is probably better at Kirkland or Sidley. HOWEVER, as a junior, no one should care about deal size and deal flow. You get shit work wherever you go and it doesn’t really change based on the number of zeroes tacked onto a deal.

2) I’m the anon with friends at Barack Ferrazzano. They seemed to get a little “more” substantive work, albeit not much. Most of what we did on a daily basis was the same. I just had to work almost everyday for months on end while most of the time, they had both Saturday and Sunday to themselves. But that’s why I got paid more.

3) the firm is fine with shorts and T-shirts.