What's going on at Skadden? Forum

[Anonymous User]

A true v10 firm is not supposed to defer to 2021. Some people are even trying to justify it. Why would they defer if they are as financially strong as you think?

[soft blue]

This has yet to be determined. Let's check back in a year.

Regardless of whether you agree with the rest of RedGiant's post(s), they're almost certainly right that Skadden won't see a dip in the quality of their applicant pool. Latham certainly didn't, and they did far worse to their people.

The fact is that 2Ls don't do any real research on firms before OCI. They look at Vault rankings. They maybe talk to friends. Remember, a significant chunk of them have literally never held a full-time job, so there's no clear expectation of what they should expect/demand from an employer.

I agree with all of this. I also think the cavalier attitude suggests that Skadden is seeing a structural shift ahead - and that they'll probably need fewer and fewer associates. Sophisticated users of legal services have been moving away from using biglaw for routine things (NDAs, commercial contracts, licensing, etc) for a long time now; the InCloudCounsels of the world and smaller/regional firms have been eating that work for a while. The groups that still do those sorts of things are less profitable than the core transactional and litigation groups anyway, and their partners feel it (and so push on volume rather than premium billing).

I think there's been a shift towards hiring fewer summers/1st years at top NY big law for a while; Kirkland and Latham remain outliers, but they're also quicker to filter, historically, in all sorts of ways. Skadden may just be predicting a bigger market shift, in which they have less demand for new first years going forward. The salary pressure will still come from firms that want the best talent but aren't traditionally highly ranked (e.g., Milbank in 2018) - but the pressure coupled with lower client demand may mean that you're basically going to have to be at Wachtell/Cravath level to get into any of the V20, rather than just the V2, in years to come.

Someone who thinks that WLRK and CSM have the same hiring standards is someone who's so uninformed that you should ignore them.

[Anonymous User]

A true v10 firm is not supposed to defer to 2021. Some people are even trying to justify it. Why would they defer if they are as financially strong as you think?

Oh, I have no opinion on their financial strength one way or another. Rather, I was joking in response to this:
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/09/vault-1 ... rica-2021/

So, other than STB, the only V10 that defers its incoming associates... moves up in the ranks? That's rich.

Edit. accidental anon (Windjammer from above)

[Scallion]

A true v10 firm is not supposed to defer to 2021. Some people are even trying to justify it. Why would they defer if they are as financially strong as you think?

Oh, I have no opinion on their financial strength one way or another. Rather, I was joking in response to this:
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/09/vault-1 ... rica-2021/

So, other than STB, the only V10 that defers its incoming associates... moves up in the ranks? That's rich.

Edit. accidental anon (Windjammer from above)

That's because of the lag in vault rankings. Associates had already done evals for this year's rankings before covid hit.

Edit: More precisely, before covid was treated as catastrophic in the US in March 2020. It had already hit during the fall of 2019.

[Anonymous User]

Someone who thinks that WLRK and CSM have the same hiring standards is someone who's so uninformed that you should ignore them.

Yep. Cravath is a generic V10 these days and has been for a long while. I was offered at Cravath. Wachtell wouldn't even give me a screener. Cravath's average CB GPA is around every other V10 in its HQ market.Wachtell's is not.

Cravath: 3.75

Skadden: 3.80
S&C: 3.83
Latham (LA): 3.75
Kirkland (Chi): 3.76
DPW: 3.72
STB: 3.71
GDC: No data
PW: 3.73

Wachtell? 3.96.

They're not in the same league.

Anon, because I talked about my Cravath offer and have disclosed data that make it apparent what class year I graduated in.

[Anonymous User]

That's because of the lag in vault rankings. Associates had already done evals for this year's rankings before covid hit.

Thanks for clarifying, helpful!

Cravath: 3.75 [...]
Wachtell? 3.96.

0.21 is drastic and not even the whole picture. What's more salient to me is pedigree selectivity.
CMR regularlry offers to folks outside T50 (e.g. Tulane). Meanwhile, applicants at UVA or Berkeley would have a hard time landing Wachtell even with 3.96 because the firm leans so heavily on the T5. I think in the firm's entire history, their sole hire from UT was William T. Allen... and that was after he'd been chancellor of the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. So yeah, it's not even close.

[Scallion]

Cravath: 3.75

Skadden: 3.80
S&C: 3.83
Latham (LA): 3.75
Kirkland (Chi): 3.76
DPW: 3.72
STB: 3.71
GDC: No data
PW: 3.73

Wachtell? 3.96.

They're not in the same league.

Anon, because I talked about my Cravath offer and have disclosed data that make it apparent what class year I graduated in.

Can you explain where you're getting these GPA numbers from? If it's your school, can you give a general range of your school's rank? They seem ultra high, and I know lawyers who got into these firms with grades closer to 3.0.

[the lsat failure]

If anything, I'd be worrying less about how you are treated, and more about how you are going to shine when you get there, because there's a very real chance your class will be a "lost year" in that the kids who start in the Fall after you may leapfrog you. Your class may get less experience and be less "favored" than those who start at a regular cadence and onboard in a non-remote fashion. (Source: worked at Latham in '07-'09...this actually happened.)
Chin up, and definitely quit whi[n]ing. Because your sense of entitlement is palpable and it's not going to go over well when you finally start work.

This is Nathan'd
He got Latham'd
He ain't Saddened
You got Skaddened

Simply beautiful.

[Yea All Right]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

[Anonymous User]

Cravath: 3.75

Skadden: 3.80
S&C: 3.83
Latham (LA): 3.75
Kirkland (Chi): 3.76
DPW: 3.72
STB: 3.71
GDC: No data
PW: 3.73

Wachtell? 3.96.

They're not in the same league.

Anon, because I talked about my Cravath offer and have disclosed data that make it apparent what class year I graduated in.

Can you explain where you're getting these GPA numbers from? If it's your school, can you give a general range of your school's rank? They seem ultra high, and I know lawyers who got into these firms with grades closer to 3.0.

The numbers don't make sense, unless you are from TTT

[Anonymous User]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

Edit* sorry, accidental anon.

[ksm6969]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know what Skadden is doing with regard to 19-20 clerks? I was told by a friend that some were not welcomed back.

[Ultramar vistas]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

Amazing. I’m told that they take such a large class and then spread the work out that about half of the Skadden NYC first years aren’t even bonus eligible. I don’t understand how a firm that’s not cravath scale for that many junior associates can be ranked #2 but life is full of mysteries.

[Anonymous User]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

It must have been some expensive cheese

[Anonymous User]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

Amazing. I’m told that they take such a large class and then spread the work out that about half of the Skadden NYC first years aren’t even bonus eligible. I don’t understand how a firm that’s not cravath scale for that many junior associates can be ranked #2 but life is full of mysteries.

Skadden associate who got no bonus'd first year here. Still salty. Was not the only one. Mentioned it to a partner I'm close with once and said it's off-market relative to peer firms, and then he went on rattling off a bunch of like 20-30 ranked firms as proof that it's not off-market. "Plus, if you don't hit the minimum, you're not really working so it's like you're getting a huge salary to sit back. Actually a great deal for juniors if you think about it." Like..sure man, but if my friend who billed 1400 her first year at Ropes got 15k at year-end, and I billed 1630 and got 0k at year-end, and I have no control over my staffing as a first year, then...Skadden is a terrible place to be a junior (but it's a bit better to be a midlevel, given their profile and constant access to work once you're senior enough to actually exploit that)

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Skadden associate who got no bonus'd first year here. Still salty. Was not the only one. Mentioned it to a partner I'm close with once and said it's off-market relative to peer firms, and then he went on rattling off a bunch of like 20-30 ranked firms as proof that it's not off-market. "Plus, if you don't hit the minimum, you're not really working so it's like you're getting a huge salary to sit back. Actually a great deal for juniors if you think about it." Like..sure man, but if my friend who billed 1400 her first year at Ropes got 15k at year-end, and I billed 1630 and got 0k at year-end, and I have no control over my staffing as a first year, then...Skadden is a terrible place to be a junior (but it's a bit better to be a midlevel, given their profile and constant access to work once you're senior enough to actually exploit that)

"Constant access to work" is not the gift you think it is.

[Anonymous User]

Cravath: 3.75

Skadden: 3.80
S&C: 3.83
Latham (LA): 3.75
Kirkland (Chi): 3.76
DPW: 3.72
STB: 3.71
GDC: No data
PW: 3.73

Wachtell? 3.96.

They're not in the same league.

Anon, because I talked about my Cravath offer and have disclosed data that make it apparent what class year I graduated in.

Can you explain where you're getting these GPA numbers from? If it's your school, can you give a general range of your school's rank? They seem ultra high, and I know lawyers who got into these firms with grades closer to 3.0.

The numbers don't make sense, unless you are from TTT

I'm OP of the CB GPA numbers, and they are from my alma mater T13. They are a few years old (but only a few). The 25th and Minimum callback GPA numbers can and do drop significantly. Six of the V10 have minimum numbers around 3.0 in their home markets, including Cravath. No data for GDC. PW data has a 3.4 minimum in NY, but I don't have data on other officers. S&C and Skadden had CB GPAs around 3.0 in many markets but around 3.5 in NY. Wachtell's minimum? 3.88.

[Anonymous User]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

Amazing. I’m told that they take such a large class and then spread the work out that about half of the Skadden NYC first years aren’t even bonus eligible. I don’t understand how a firm that’s not cravath scale for that many junior associates can be ranked #2 but life is full of mysteries.

Skadden associate who got no bonus'd first year here. Still salty. Was not the only one. Mentioned it to a partner I'm close with once and said it's off-market relative to peer firms, and then he went on rattling off a bunch of like 20-30 ranked firms as proof that it's not off-market. "Plus, if you don't hit the minimum, you're not really working so it's like you're getting a huge salary to sit back. Actually a great deal for juniors if you think about it." Like..sure man, but if my friend who billed 1400 her first year at Ropes got 15k at year-end, and I billed 1630 and got 0k at year-end, and I have no control over my staffing as a first year, then...Skadden is a terrible place to be a junior (but it's a bit better to be a midlevel, given their profile and constant access to work once you're senior enough to actually exploit that)

Skadden midlevel here. My impression has always been that since pro bono is counted equal to paid work for bonus purposes you have to try pretty hard--or at least be indifferent--to not get a bonus. Even if your group is not busy, there is always an abundance of pro bono opportunities to make up any hours deficit, so I really don't understand folks like the above poster who complain about not hitting their hours and not getting a bonus.

[Anonymous User]

How did Skadden go up in the rankings after that cheese plate story from bonus season a couple years ago?

What story would that be?

A few years ago at a firm reception, Skadden made a surprise announcement that bonus-eligible hours threshold was going up by 200 hours, and then right after had a reception with one platter of cheese for the whole NY office.

Amazing. I’m told that they take such a large class and then spread the work out that about half of the Skadden NYC first years aren’t even bonus eligible. I don’t understand how a firm that’s not cravath scale for that many junior associates can be ranked #2 but life is full of mysteries.

Skadden associate who got no bonus'd first year here. Still salty. Was not the only one. Mentioned it to a partner I'm close with once and said it's off-market relative to peer firms, and then he went on rattling off a bunch of like 20-30 ranked firms as proof that it's not off-market. "Plus, if you don't hit the minimum, you're not really working so it's like you're getting a huge salary to sit back. Actually a great deal for juniors if you think about it." Like..sure man, but if my friend who billed 1400 her first year at Ropes got 15k at year-end, and I billed 1630 and got 0k at year-end, and I have no control over my staffing as a first year, then...Skadden is a terrible place to be a junior (but it's a bit better to be a midlevel, given their profile and constant access to work once you're senior enough to actually exploit that)

Skadden midlevel here. My impression has always been that since pro bono is counted equal to paid work for bonus purposes you have to try pretty hard--or at least be indifferent--to not get a bonus. Even if your group is not busy, there is always an abundance of pro bono opportunities to make up any hours deficit, so I really don't understand folks like the above poster who complain about not hitting their hours and not getting a bonus.

No bonus'd first-year Skadden anon here. I get the above (which is why I'm salty but not ragequitty about it), but it doesn't change the fact that (a) plenty of Skadden's peers don't have an hours threshold to begin with and (b) in my case, I billed over 200 to pro bono in my first year (and maxed the 100 hour knowledge management bucket) and was actually told by a staffing partner to take less pro bono because "real work would come in and slam you if you overload on pro bono" --- only for real work to never materialize.

Once real work did start materializing in my second year onward, I've billed 2000+ per year since. And at this point if I missed a bonus threshold, I'd feel like it was my own fault (since I'm senior enough to anticipate deal flows and ride the correct waves, etc.). Still feels ridiculous to punish first years for workflow.

Worth noting that if we were at any number of comparable firms, we wouldn't find ourselves having this conversation. If I were a 2L picking a firm at OCI, I'd disqualify Skadden on this basis personally.

[Scallion]

I'm OP of the CB GPA numbers, and they are from my alma mater T13. They are a few years old (but only a few). The 25th and Minimum callback GPA numbers can and do drop significantly. Six of the V10 have minimum numbers around 3.0 in their home markets, including Cravath. No data for GDC. PW data has a 3.4 minimum in NY, but I don't have data on other officers. S&C and Skadden had CB GPAs around 3.0 in many markets but around 3.5 in NY. Wachtell's minimum? 3.88.

Thanks for explaining. The bold figures are consistent with the GPAs of people who I've seen get biglaw from T14, so I was having a hard time understanding why you included much higher GPAs in your initial post. They made it look like you can't get biglaw from a T14 without absurdly high GPAs, which (as someone suggested) might actually be true if you're from a TTT. Your point about Wachtell having a high hurdle stands.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for explaining. The bold figures are consistent with the GPAs of people who I've seen get biglaw from T14, so I was having a hard time understanding why you included much higher GPAs in your initial post. They made it look like you can't get biglaw from a T14 without absurdly high GPAs, which (as someone suggested) might actually be true if you're from a TTT. Your point about Wachtell having a high hurdle stands.

Same OP, sorry for the confusion.

Biglaw definitely has a ton of folks with what are considered average GPAs from the T13.

The vast majority of students at V10 firms, however, have very high GPAs. You probably hear from the folks that squeaked into a V10 with a 3.2 GPA more simply because they have an "I beat the odds story" that they both want to share and you want to hear. The gal with cum laude and order of the coif grades on the firm website probably isn't bringing up her GPA, because her outcome is in a sense unremarkable; it was wholly expected.

Once you drop to the V50, 3.2-3.4 GPA students are the norm at my T13 for median callback GPA. DLA Piper, Fried Frank, Shearman & Sterling, etc. are filled with tons of T13 students getting paid market salaries with incredibly mediocre grades. If you're at a TT or TTT though, you're probably going to need to be order of the coif to land there.

I think the TT/TTT situation (meaning the schools that only send the top 10% to biglaw) is interesting. At a T13, if you're at the top of your class, then you're competitive for a V5. As you go down the GPA curve, you become competitive for less and less prestigious firms. From my experience watching TT/TTT folks, if you're at the top of you're class you're competitive for V5-V100, but if you're not at the top of your class you aren't competitive for anything in the biglaw realm.