Top Law Schools

More specifically, the question is whether I can make an inference that my group’s business is gradually waning and, if so, whether I should start looking to lateral on that basis.

I work for a large firm in a specific subgroup (approaching niche) of a large umbrella group—litigation. The office is small ish in a secondary market. Firm is healthy and larger litigation group at this office (as a whole) is healthy.

Over the past few years, very talented and qualified attorneys who seemingly have solid business have failed to make partner in my group. Partners retire and do not get replaced. Associates go in house in the normal course, but have only gotten replaced (with both new associates and laterals) at something like a 2:3 ratio (2 associates come while 3 leave). There used to be some leverage, but now partner: associate ratio is more like 1:1.

Where being swamped had been common frequently, now it’s less frequent. Only 1-2 of us make hours annually. (I note that I always do, but I really put effort into getting enough work to do so).

Anyway, is what I described normal ebb and flow (maybe even the group being safe in anticipation of recession), or is it indicitave of a bigger problem? And if bigger problem, where I am making hours and the firm is healthy and the much larger lit group is healthy, is this anything that I personally should be concerning myself with (assume here that I don’t care about partnership).

Thanks in advance.

I think you're looking at the right metrics. They obviously don't bode particularly well for the group but it also doesn't seem like a "head for the exits" kind of scenario. And unfortunately it's probably going to be challenging for us to give you any more particular insight into the group.

Do you have a partner mentor in the group that you trust? I think this is a good conversation to start having with them, particularly as move from midlevel to a senior associate (which is where I am assuming you are). Some partners are very hush hush about the money, but others can be pretty open about the financial side of the practice group. It can't hurt to ask.

shock259 wrote:I think you're looking at the right metrics. They obviously don't bode particularly well for the group but it also doesn't seem like a "head for the exits" kind of scenario. And unfortunately it's probably going to be challenging for us to give you any more particular insight into the group.

Do you have a partner mentor in the group that you trust? I think this is a good conversation to start having with them, particularly as move from midlevel to a senior associate (which is where I am assuming you are). Some partners are very hush hush about the money, but others can be pretty open about the financial side of the practice group. It can't hurt to ask.

OP here. I do have partners that I have good relationships with, but I just cannot see this conversation going well with either of them. I just can’t picture the convo occurring and it not potentially looking like I’m thinking about leaving and/or insulting the financial health of a group for which they are literally responsible for the financial health.

I mean one problem with biglaw is that there are just so many horror stories. I’m definitely not living a horror story. But how do I know that the next lateral group I might find myself in (maybe same prestige level or slightly higher, maybe I take a class year hit, maybe chances for partnership increase) that looks so nice on paper isn’t gonna put me in one of those horror story scenarios?

I know that today’s biglaw gets a lot of criticism for no longer being a relatively short partnership track. But my least favorite thing about the industry is the whole peak then subsequent decline of lateral associate marketability eventually resulting in absurdly high billing rate and likely a corresponding push out. Why can’t I just chill out and keep being an associate for another 5-10 years without all this pressure to go partner, in house, lateral, govt, etc.? I just don’t like the idea of my marketability waning, I guess. Maybe that’s why I’m getting so concerned, here, when my situation is by most metrics a very good one for biglaw.

Anonymous User wrote:Over the past few years, very talented and qualified attorneys who seemingly have solid business have failed to make partner in my group. Partners retire and do not get replaced. Associates go in house in the normal course, but have only gotten replaced (with both new associates and laterals) at something like a 2:3 ratio (2 associates come while 3 leave).

Do you know anything about the profitability of your group? Do the partners that run your office have clout at headquarters? Does your office have clout at headquarters? Have you tried to grab coffee with the "very talented and qualified attorneys who seemingly have solid business" to ask them about how they approached being a midlevel and senior at your firm, in your group? They're the ones who will have good, off the cuff advice...not us. Find them, gently ask for advice, and it'll all come spilling out. Good luck.