BSF (NY) v. Kellogg Hansen? Forum

[Anonymous User]

From the current Vault page on BSF:

"There is no annual billable-hours requirement or target, but our compensation is based largely on our hours (through a compensation formula that is not disclosed to the associates). Pro bono counts toward our hours for formula compensation purposes, but business development and training do not. Associates who bill a low number of hours may receive a bonus that is lower than the Cravath market scale. Associates who bill a high number of hours are likely to receive a bonus that exceeds the Cravath market scale. However, it is hard to say for certain, because the components of the formula (how the formula is calculated) have never been disclosed to associates."

Fair, I see why someone would rely upon this.

It is not accurate anymore (if it ever was).

No associate can know with certainty what his or her bonus will be, but the mechanics of the formula have been fully disclosed to associates.

just as another datapoint here (since it seems we're all anonymous, for obvious reasons), during a callback within the last few years an associate told me the mechanics of the formula as well. certainly didn't give the impression it was a black box.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know (from experience, friends, or otherwise) if the interviews at BSF are only for fit-and-personality, or are more intense/substantive? As far as I know it's really only WLRK that is intense/substantive (not even Kellogg is), but BSF schedules 30 min. interview blocks, just like WLRK (and unlike, say, some other V5s). (To my mind questions like "why [this firm]?" fall into the first bucket rather than the second.)

[Anonymous User]

Interviewed at both. BSF was a bit more probing than a typical V10, but WLRK was the only firm that asked me to explain a legal issue, gave a hypo, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know (from experience, friends, or otherwise) if the interviews at BSF are only for fit-and-personality, or are more intense/substantive? As far as I know it's really only WLRK that is intense/substantive (not even Kellogg is), but BSF schedules 30 min. interview blocks, just like WLRK (and unlike, say, some other V5s). (To my mind questions like "why [this firm]?" fall into the first bucket rather than the second.)

My BSF screener (through my school's normal 2L summer hiring process) and callback were normal fit & personality, with maybe one or two vaguely substantive questions asked across all the interviewers. On the other hand I didn't find my WLRK callback especially intense either, definitely slightly more substantive than normal but still plenty of fit/personality questions. (FWIW I got an offer from both.)

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know (from experience, friends, or otherwise) if the interviews at BSF are only for fit-and-personality, or are more intense/substantive? As far as I know it's really only WLRK that is intense/substantive (not even Kellogg is), but BSF schedules 30 min. interview blocks, just like WLRK (and unlike, say, some other V5s). (To my mind questions like "why [this firm]?" fall into the first bucket rather than the second.)

My BSF screener (through my school's normal 2L summer hiring process) and callback were normal fit & personality, with maybe one or two vaguely substantive questions asked across all the interviewers. On the other hand I didn't find my WLRK callback especially intense either, definitely slightly more substantive than normal but still plenty of fit/personality questions. (FWIW I got an offer from both.)

Just a little off topic, but to the previous anonymous poster who interviewed at both BSF and WLRK, what were your impressions of the two firms during your CB interviews? Where did you ultimately decide to go, and why? (I'm guessing most people who get a WLRK offer accept it, but jic!)

[Anonymous User]

If there are any BSF people or former BSF people here, can you speak to the qualify of life in terms of admin support and day-to-day firm organization? One thing I've heard is that BSF tends not to invest in things like inter-office tech, document software, admin and logistics, data banks, etc. Are associates effectively doing some paralegal work to make up for this, as compared to associates at V10 firms with well-run support systems? It may be that this view is now dated, but I'm not sure.

[Anonymous User]

If there are any BSF people or former BSF people here, can you speak to the qualify of life in terms of admin support and day-to-day firm organization? One thing I've heard is that BSF tends not to invest in things like inter-office tech, document software, admin and logistics, data banks, etc. Are associates effectively doing some paralegal work to make up for this, as compared to associates at V10 firms with well-run support systems? It may be that this view is now dated, but I'm not sure.

my interviewer told me it was the thing he liked the least about BSF, but didn't end up going there so I can't tell you firsthand

[Anonymous User]

I know people have commented on both firms in other threads, but I was wondering if people have thoughts about them as the only two choices, specifically.

Regarding location, I prefer NY to DC in terms of life outside work, but I likely won't have much of a social life either way, right? Will BSF hours be worse just b/c it's in NY, while KH is in DC?

Regarding $$$, BSF's year-end bonus is a black box, while KH at least for the first 2 years is pretty clear. BSF's bonuses this past year were really high, but as someone mentioned in another thread recently, that might be a one-off anomaly. KH doesn't give year-end for first 2 years, it's effectively the clerkship bonus lumped up as a set number.

Regarding work, I get the feeling BSF is a little more NY-style finance driven, while KH takes more varied commercial work. Both firms have a self-starter mentality, but KH did seem a little more relaxed.

Regarding culture, that's the hardest to tell. KH is much smaller; BSF had a reputation as a sweatshop in the past that I think might be alleviating now. Are people worried BSF may be in flux in the coming years?

Any thoughts on any of the above, or either firm in general, would be great.

Do you have offers from these firms? If so, ask the BSF mid-to-senior associates about compensation (this is a very common question). They have to tell you the truth, and you might be surprised about what you find out.

[Anonymous User]

Interviewed at both, offers from both (WLRK and BSF). I ended up choosing BSF for three reasons: 1) I clicked far more with associates and partners I met; 2) to me, it seemed like the cases BSF takes on are far more interesting than are the ones taken on by WLRK (including more one-off individual representation and some interesting plaintiff work); 3. the hours, while in no way easy, seemed to be both fewer and more flexibly fulfilled at BSF than at WLRK.

I don't think you can go wrong if you have this choice though!