[delete] Forum

[Anonymous User]

[delete]

[sparty99]

I am a second year associate (class of 2018) and I'm noticing some signs. I'm wondering if I should be worried. Those signs are:

1. I almost always get administrative work. I have done almost exclusively (a) citechecking, (b) document review, (c) being loaned out to other teams for citechecking and document review, (d) working with paralegals a lot for various administrative tasks, (e) preparing for presentation slides for classes (non billable).

2. I am in litigation but have not written a single thing, not even a letter to the court.

3. I never go to court hearings.

4. The other junior associate (class of 2017) always gets (a) brief writing, (b) overseeing giant work streams, (c) direct interaction with many partners, (d) oral arguments (he actually gets to go), etc.

5. When we had a trial to prep I got no witness to prep. Everyone else on the team did/still does.

6. Everyone else on the team has some work, except me. Granted, it's the holiday season, but it's been this way for about 10 days.

7. The other junior is pretty harsh with me about my work, and he sometimes "assigns" me work and "reviews" my work. Sometimes at the request of the partner/senior, sometimes as a part of the "giant workstream".

I requested to the HR to switch teams/department and reported both the senior associate and junior associate for their mismanagement. It's been several months, the HR followed up, but nothing has changed. Instead, I was taken off of some projects and was given other projects, which are not moving forward (but maybe due to holidays). The teammates are nicer to me in the recent past though.

Pls do not quote this! But thank you in advance for your advice.

Edited to add: I don't think this firm is doing badly financially and at least as far as I know, I don't know that this firm has a practice of firing/asking associates to leave when they're as junior as me.

You need to find a new firm. Your current firm sucks. You should have written several motions by now, attended routine case management conferences even for a Partner who was busy. You need to start applying today. You are gaining no subsitutive experience and this is only weakening your career. You must leave immediately.

[ClubberLang]

You reported two associates to hr for their mismanagement? Seems totally reasonable that nobody wants to work with you. Find a new firm and do better.

[Anonymous User]

You reported two associates to hr for their mismanagement? Seems totally reasonable that nobody wants to work with you. Find a new firm and do better.

There was yelling and some insulting comments involved from both of them. The HR seemed very receptive and ended up giving those associates a talk, which I think changed their behavior.

[ClubberLang]

Sounds like the firm did what they needed to do.

You understand that you are dealing with human beings, right? The people you reported never want to work with you again, and they told all their friends about you. You can't tell on people for "mismanagement" as a newly minted associate and expect good results.

[Wild Card]

You reported two associates to hr for their mismanagement? Seems totally reasonable that nobody wants to work with you. Find a new firm and do better.

There was yelling and some insulting comments involved from both of them. The HR seemed very receptive and ended up giving those associates a talk, which I think changed their behavior.

Is this some sort of New Year's flame? Now they won't give you work and they'll throw you under the bus when they're asked to review you. Also, requesting a transfer is extremely dangerous business, because HR will reach out to key partners in your group to let them know. In short, now you've pissed off everyone, and they are most certainly going to fire you.

[Anonymous User]

You reported two associates to hr for their mismanagement? Seems totally reasonable that nobody wants to work with you. Find a new firm and do better.

There was yelling and some insulting comments involved from both of them. The HR seemed very receptive and ended up giving those associates a talk, which I think changed their behavior.

Is this some sort of New Year's flame? Now they won't give you work and they'll throw you under the bus when they're asked to review you. Also, requesting a transfer is extremely dangerous business, because HR will reach out to key partners in your group to let them know. In short, now you've pissed off everyone, and they are most certainly going to fire you.

I am getting work, although little bit, from both associates. The partner has also been acting much nicer to me and giving me more work. The firm has a non-retaliation policy though, so that wouldn't help at all? I was just worried because I was taken off some projects that were more long term but I was also given a part in a more project that typically goes to a more senior associate.

[Anonymous User]

How is HR going to prove that something was retaliatory? The associates/partners can just say you’re not a good associate and point to some mistakes you’ve made in the past.

I’ve reported a partner once but I was ready to quit at that point. Same thing: constant screaming, degrading comments, etc. on top of being a terrible manager. I told HR that I will quit if this doesn’t change. He is a nightmare to work for. He’s relaxed a bit after someone spoke to him. But, the difference between you and me is that there aren’t two layers of associates to dole out work to in my group. And the way your team is staffed, it seems like you’re pretty expendable.

[nixy]

I mean, in an ideal universe you should be able to go to HR about problems with your higher-ranking co-workers and HR would fix it and that would be the end of it. But because that’s how it should work doesn’t mean that’s how it does work, and frankly it could well turn those associates against you (and others who will see you as a complainer) and get you frozen out. I hate that advocating for yourself was the wrong move, but it was probably the wrong move. People being nicer to you to your face isn’t really an improvement if it means they’re not giving you decent work.

(Also, and I’m sorry to sound this cynical, but if you belong to a group underrepresented at the firm, there may be a greater reluctance to fire you for fear of a lawsuit, but it doesn’t mean you’ll have good relationships there and get good experience.)

You can stay there and try to improve things and stick it out, but chances are that you will do better starting anew somewhere. And the sooner you move the better bc the lack of substantive experience will look worse and worse the more senior you are.

[cfcm]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

[jarofsoup]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

You mean that having someone with no experience review someone’s work who also has no experience is the pinnacle of efficiency?

[nixy]

Since when are biglaw firms held up as models of efficiency? Normal =/= the most efficient way to do something.

[Chardee_MacDennis]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

You mean that having someone with no experience review someone’s work who also has no experience is the pinnacle of efficiency?

No one said anything about “efficiency,” and there’s nothing unusual about this staffing model. It’s likely the second year is the first level of review and not the final arbiter of work product. It’s to ensure that the work product isn’t complete dog shit before making its way to a more senior associate or partner.

OP, I agree with everyone here—you need to start looking. It’s likely that these two associates didn’t have a great impression of your work prior to you going to HR, and now they aren’t likely to work with you again after this.

[esther0123]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

You mean that having someone with no experience review someone’s work who also has no experience is the pinnacle of efficiency?

No one said anything about “efficiency,” and there’s nothing unusual about this staffing model. It’s likely the second year is the first level of review and not the final arbiter of work product. It’s to ensure that the work product isn’t complete dog shit before making its way to a more senior associate or partner.

OP, I agree with everyone here—you need to start looking. It’s likely that these two associates didn’t have a great impression of your work prior to you going to HR, and now they aren’t likely to work with you again after this.

But does someone just one year more senior add that much value that it really transforms the work? I would imagine there should be at least 2 years or so difference for a review to take place.

[Bllljd115]

Sounds like you are in litigation. From what you describe it sounds like a normal, hierarchical biglaw model where the most junior associate is given an organizational/administrative role until they are needed to move up and taken on new work, usually because more senior associates leave or are busy. A year may not sound like much, but in that type of model it can make a huge difference in the type of work you get. I am not surprised that you weren't given a trial witness to prep, prepping a witness for trial is something that is fairly complicated and requires some experience as well as a good grasp of the case overall. As for attending oral arguments, the other junior probably gets to go because they have not attended many oral arguments and they need to get that experience.

Ordinarily, I would tell you to bide your time and wait - eventually you'll get some drafting experience, get to jump in and attend court. Or, you'll reach year 3-4 and be able to lateral to midlaw or a boutique with a lower leverage ratio. But realistically, I think that is going to be difficult now that you've complained about other people in the department. You'll be known as not a team player and disruptive and it's not likely you'll advance as quickly as you would otherwise.

I would think about whether biglaw is really for you. The unfair truth is that partners, senior associates, etc. are extremely busy and are dealing with constant demands from clients, opposing counsel, other partners, etc. What often falls by the wayside is junior associate development and good management.

[jarofsoup]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

You mean that having someone with no experience review someone’s work who also has no experience is the pinnacle of efficiency?

No one said anything about “efficiency,” and there’s nothing unusual about this staffing model. It’s likely the second year is the first level of review and not the final arbiter of work product. It’s to ensure that the work product isn’t complete dog shit before making its way to a more senior associate or partner.

OP, I agree with everyone here—you need to start looking. It’s likely that these two associates didn’t have a great impression of your work prior to you going to HR, and now they aren’t likely to work with you again after this.

But does someone just one year more senior add that much value that it really transforms the work? I would imagine there should be at least 2 years or so difference for a review to take place.

Yeah exactly. It would make sense for a mid level to do this type of review not another junior. Why even assign it to a first year then?

OP don’t rat on your colleagues. If a second year is a dick to you who cares? They have no role in your review process at that level.

You may want to look. It looks like the culture of your firm sucks.

Edit- mods -I accidentally did anon so you can out me if you like.

[Bllljd115]

There is a lot to unpack here, but the idea that a second year is assigning and reviewing a first year’s work seems entirely normal.

You mean that having someone with no experience review someone’s work who also has no experience is the pinnacle of efficiency?

No one said anything about “efficiency,” and there’s nothing unusual about this staffing model. It’s likely the second year is the first level of review and not the final arbiter of work product. It’s to ensure that the work product isn’t complete dog shit before making its way to a more senior associate or partner.

OP, I agree with everyone here—you need to start looking. It’s likely that these two associates didn’t have a great impression of your work prior to you going to HR, and now they aren’t likely to work with you again after this.

But does someone just one year more senior add that much value that it really transforms the work? I would imagine there should be at least 2 years or so difference for a review to take place.

Senior associate here. Sometimes it's not necessarily whether the work is better but whether it can be done in less time. New junior associates literally have to learn how to do every single thing and are constantly making small annoying mistakes, not because they are bad but because nobody bothers to teach them how to do something and because many of the things considered "mistakes" in biglaw aren't something a new associate even knows to look for. Someone a year more senior who has done that thing once or twice can do it more accurately in less time.

Sometimes you just also need to keep things moving but don't have an hour to review something, so you delegate the review to a junior associate while you have to deal with other things. It's all part of the management structure and trying to juggle multiple projects on tight deadlines.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. So I take it that everyone's opinion is that I should start looking. Or should I wait until my review (will get one in 2020), see if I'll be switched to a different team, or do I not have enough time, even though I'm very junior? Apparently the HR had recommended that the entire team be disassembled, not just me, and told the other junior that he should also consider switching teams. So I'm hoping that maybe I can just go to another department and start fresh.

[nixy]

But does someone just one year more senior add that much value that it really transforms the work? I would imagine there should be at least 2 years or so difference for a review to take place.

I'm sure this varies a lot by firm/people, but from the kind of work the OP described doing, it doesn't sound like you'd need a lot of experience to be able to review it.

[jarofsoup]

Seems like a mess. I don’t understand the story really... something is off. Did the associate get really really aggressive with you or something?

You should look before you are reviewed. Keep your options open.

[$$$$$$]

If I were you I would start looking like yesterday. Bad situation to be in, and just because you had issues with two senior people doesn't mean that you don't already have a reputation that others will want to avoid. I'd lateral somewhere and then change your whole outlook on what this job is supposed to be. A 2nd year reviewing a 1st year's work is pretty normal, one person at least knows what is going on and the other has no idea. I often have juniors review 1st year work before I look since I'm too busy to be catching typos and other shit that a first year gets wrong.

Also, ratting on co-workers is a huge no-no unless you don't care about being fired and want to blow up someone's spot. In the future, go directly to the person and discuss, don't try to put a black mark in with HR in the hopes they'll like you more, they definitely will not.

I'd try and get out ASAP if your team is being disbanded. They may find another place for you or they may say you aren't worth the hassle. Definitely start looking.

[Anonymous User]

Seems like a mess. I don’t understand the story really... something is off. Did the associate get really really aggressive with you or something?

You should look before you are reviewed. Keep your options open.

The senior screamed at me over a mistake and the junior told me that I was getting scut work because I had done bad work and ruined my reputation after I dropped the ball on a project. I didn't think either was appropriate.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw partner here who regularly leads large teams on matters. My advice to you is to lateral ASAP and think about what you can do in the future not to end up in the same position. My experience has been that while poor treatment of an associate happens from time to time, if it is occurring regularly to one associate in particular, then it makes sense to examine the common denominator. Weak performers (not careful enough, miss deadlines, not organized, substantively lagging peers, poor attitude) are spotted really quickly by other team members and biglaw is not a very forgiving or understanding place. The anger/frustration being directed at you is usually the culmination of long simmering resentment by your teammates at your sustained underperformance. While you may think it is coming out of nowhere and just related to a single ball you dropped, in fact it is almost always the case that your teammates have had to put up with you for a long time and finally are at wit's end and snap.

Reporting "meanness" to HR is a big mistake. HR is powerless in biglaw - they work for the lawyers and not the other way around. The way I see it is that you couldn't work out your issues with your co-workers and had to run to mommy to step in and fix things for you. You are an adult now in an industry that is known for, and takes pride in, its toughness. If you can't resolve your own interpersonal problems, how can you be trusted to handle an important case and fight for your clients, especially in litigation?

Lateral ASAP.

[jarofsoup]

Almost seems like the junior was trying to help you by saying hey here is the reason why x is happening and you told on him.

If you didn’t go to HR you probably could have just rode out a crappy project and then maybe gotten onto a new case.

You should start looking. You may want to also consider a new practice area....

[nixy]

Seems like a mess. I don’t understand the story really... something is off. Did the associate get really really aggressive with you or something?

You should look before you are reviewed. Keep your options open.

The senior screamed at me over a mistake and the junior told me that I was getting scut work because I had done bad work and ruined my reputation after I dropped the ball on a project. I didn't think either was appropriate.

I get not wanting to be screamed at, but you had made a mistake. What's inappropriate about what the junior said? Sounds like they were trying to keep you informed. Wouldn't you want to know if people thought you'd done bad work and your reputation was shot?