Behind as a midlevel? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi all. I'm a rising 3rd year in a biglaw M&A group. As such, I'm currently going through the transition from junior to midlevel and just feel totally behind and like I'm not meeting expectations. Since my class started in this group, most of us have been pretty slow and haven't billed what would be considered "normal" in biglaw by any means. This is probably a result of the group hiring too many people and work getting spread thin amongst us--there are maybe a few rock stars who have been getting all the great work and the rest of us have just had an honestly pretty chill two years for the most part. To top it off, I went on medical leave for the last few months and as such, have missed out on a lot of work opportunities.


I've had great reviews so far, but feel like I'm about to reach a turning point. I'm starting to straddle between mundane junior tasks since (I'm the most junior person on some of my deals) and being trusted with midlevel tasks. While I'm fine on the junior stuff now, it seems like I'm having a lot of trouble adjusting to the new midlevel stuff. I don't have much confidence in my work and I'm definitely annoying the hell out of people (including partners) by asking basic questions that I probably should already know the answers to. It's hard to know where the rest of my class is, but I feel like my reputation is going down I might fuck something up royally soon.


This has happened to at least one other class before us and they all got pushed out starting around where I am now. I'm thinking about lateraling but am afraid that I'll be pretty far behind wherever I go, both because of how slow my year has been and missing work due to leave.

For anyone that's been in a similar position, am I right to be nervous of lateraling? Should I just try to get as up to speed as possible in my current job in preparation for getting pushed out?

[UnfrozenCaveman]

You're probably fine. That's essentially what the early mid-level years are like. For learning, there are diminishing returns beyond a certain threshold of junior work so being somewhat slow as a junior is not a big deal.

[Anonymous User]

Wow, this sounds exactly like me. I could have written your same post.

I don't know the answer. I have learned a lot, but there is still a lot I don't know. Overall, I have two competing thoughts about the situation. (1) you have a good chill gig, why give it up? vs. (2) if/when you lateral, will your skills be sufficient so that you can do the work at your new firm? I want to say this is situation is normal for most folks. Perhaps others who are more senior can comment. I am going to stick it out for now and learn what I can and hope to be in a good position to lateral in a year.

[Anonymous User]

I was in this exact same position. Lateraled during the middle of my second year to another big firm. I’m in a very busy group doing the work I wanted. I don’t really like the people I work with now and I’m somewhat worried about potentially burning out and not being able to lateral again. It probably doesn’t look good to lateral twice within the first 3-5 years of your career.

Anyway, it’s a risk, but for me, it was worth taking.

[FedFan123]

A rising third year is not a midlevel lol

[nahumya]

Sounds to me like you need to get more work, whether pro bono, restructuring, or whatever. The more work, the more exposure to issues and people, the more expertise and connections, and the more additional work. Also, I would focus on ultimately building a book of business. Probably seems completely out of reach to get clients now, but maintaining relationships and ultimately referring clients to the firm is your ticket to freedom.

[Anonymous User]

Not OP (sorry for hijacking your post), but going through the same issue and need advice. I am a rising 4th year in a specialist practice. I didn't get good experience in my first two years, in a sense that I either did not have work or only got busy/repetitive work; the partners/senior associates did not want to guide me when I had questions on the substantive issues. As soon as my second year ended, my hours dropped close to zero and never got picked up. One month into my 3rd year, I was told that I could not function as a midlevel and needed to improve. But then, again, I never got the hours I need to learn and improve. Now, I have some leads on lateraling, but I am very nervous that my new employer soon will find me useless, or even worse, I will never be able to hold a job. What should I do at the new place to at least keep the job while catching up?

P.S. - I have been trying to lateral for almost 1.5 years now, but didn't find anything until recently.

[FedFan123]

It should be reassuring to the second and third years in this thread who are worried that they don’t know enough to hear that you are junior associates, not midlevels - we know you don’t know much

[Anonymous User]

It should be reassuring to the second and third years in this thread who are worried that they don’t know enough to hear that you are junior associates, not midlevels - we know you don’t know much

Maybe you've been coddled at your firm, but there are plenty of places where third years are expected to run certain parts or all of a transaction themselves. Where I worked, third years were sometimes the most senior associate on follow-on equity offerings. Yeah, that would generally happen where the transaction was pretty by the book. Yeah, the partners knew they would have to be more engaged. But if you weren't getting regular experience as a first- or second-year, good luck getting through that without some battle wounds.

[FedFan123]

Nice straw man, anon - being a midlevel has nothing to do with the amount of substantive experience. A fifth year who has done nothing but doc review isn’t a junior associate - he’s just a crappy midlevel. A second/third year who has solid experience is probably a good junior (but still sucks overall)

[FedFan123]

It should be reassuring to the second and third years in this thread who are worried that they don’t know enough to hear that you are junior associates, not midlevels - we know you don’t know much

Maybe you've been coddled at your firm, but there are plenty of places where third years are expected to run certain parts or all of a transaction themselves. Where I worked, third years were sometimes the most senior associate on follow-on equity offerings. Yeah, that would generally happen where the transaction was pretty by the book. Yeah, the partners knew they would have to be more engaged. But if you weren't getting regular experience as a first- or second-year, good luck getting through that without some battle wounds.

Meant to reply to you with my post above - whoops

[Anonymous User]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

[s1m4]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

You clerked and jumped into the corporate group as a 2nd year? Just curious, what made you pursue corporate vs litigation after the clerking experience?

[Anonymous User]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

You clerked and jumped into the corporate group as a 2nd year? Just curious, what made you pursue corporate vs litigation after the clerking experience?

Delaware chancery/SSC clerkship, so half of us go into transactional, and it does have a lot of useful knowledge (I generally predict I'm useless as a second year, but as like a 4th+ year the extra background knowledge/interest in Delaware makes up for lacking a year of transactional work).

To be honest I did try (not very hard) to get some lit jobs during clerkship, without success, so just went back to 2L firm.

[cdelgado]

I know of very few firms where a third year is midlevel.

[Anonymous User]

Nice straw man, anon - being a midlevel has nothing to do with the amount of substantive experience. A fifth year who has done nothing but doc review isn’t a junior associate - he’s just a crappy midlevel. A second/third year who has solid experience is probably a good junior (but still sucks overall)

I don’t follow what you’re trying to say. You made a snarky comment that no one responded to and then doubled down. Look, at least at my firm, you are expected to know x information or have y skills at z time, even if there is some flexibility at the margins. It is reasonable to be worried that you may not get there because you aren’t getting work or are billing low hours, etc. That’s what gets people let go.

Jumping in to say “Third years aren’t midlevels” misses the point. The more senior you get, the more you need to be able to do. At some point in time, you’ll stop being asked to do “junior” assignments. At many firms, at least with certain work, it happens as soon as a new class arrives. If you can’t make a corresponding jump, you may be in for a bad time. (That’s not to say you can’t catch up.)

[FedFan123]

I know of very few firms where a third year is midlevel.

I doubt that there are any, despite the fervent protestations of second and third years in this thread

[Anonymous User]

I know of very few firms where a third year is midlevel.

I doubt that there are any, despite the fervent protestations of second and third years in this thread

I've wondered about this. At my firm, we refer to 3rd years as midlevels, at least in the corporate group. In fact, I'm speaking on a panel during orientation for the new class and it's labeled as "advice from midlevels to juniors." I'm a third year.

We also generally view 5th years as seniors. Not sure if that's the case at other firms, too.

[2013]

I think at most firms, midlevel is 4-6 year. But there are firms on a 6/7-year partnership track, so 3rd year may be midlevels there

[FedFan123]

I know of very few firms where a third year is midlevel.

I doubt that there are any, despite the fervent protestations of second and third years in this thread

I've wondered about this. At my firm, we refer to 3rd years as midlevels, at least in the corporate group. In fact, I'm speaking on a panel during orientation for the new class and it's labeled as "advice from midlevels to juniors." I'm a third year.

We also generally view 5th years as seniors. Not sure if that's the case at other firms, too.

1-3 is junior (this is the rung most set in stone)
4-5 is midlevel
6-8 is senior
If you’re at a place with a longer track, then midlevel is 4-6

[Buglaw]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

I think I've probably seen over a hundred M&A deals (between bid processes, add ons, etc.). I've only seen one third year run an M&A deal (I mean run, not be the most senior associate on the deal, but actually be acting as a junior with a partner or counsel who is doing senior associate and partner work at the same time). She was extremely good for a third year. She, unsurprisingly, missed some significant structure issues, caused some significant delays and broke down crying on a call. I felt really bad because it was wildly inappropriate to put a third year in that position.

I guess, at least in my experience, no third year actually runs an M&A deal, and if they think they are, they don't know what good 5/6 years are doing. That being said, I have certainly met tons of third years who say they are running deals or act like midlevels. But, when I have seen what they are doing on deals, they certainly weren't acting like a midlevel.

[Auxilio]

I think this thread has mostly lost it's point.

It's not really that important what you call a third year. OP feels like they are behind what is expected of a third year, and that's a fair critique. Whatever you call them in my group, third years aren't doing much of the same work as first years,

[Anonymous User]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

I think I've probably seen over a hundred M&A deals (between bid processes, add ons, etc.). I've only seen one third year run an M&A deal (I mean run, not be the most senior associate on the deal, but actually be acting as a junior with a partner or counsel who is doing senior associate and partner work at the same time). She was extremely good for a third year. She, unsurprisingly, missed some significant structure issues, caused some significant delays and broke down crying on a call. I felt really bad because it was wildly inappropriate to put a third year in that position.

I guess, at least in my experience, no third year actually runs an M&A deal, and if they think they are, they don't know what good 5/6 years are doing. That being said, I have certainly met tons of third years who say they are running deals or act like midlevels. But, when I have seen what they are doing on deals, they certainly weren't acting like a midlevel.

Quoted anon. I want to point out that I specifically used the phrase "running large parts" of a deal as opposed to running the deal. When I've seen our third year be the most senior associate, yes the partner still does a lot more of the work then with a proper senior/mid on the deal. But the third year is still running a lot fairly autonomously, that's what I meant.

[FedFan123]

Third years in my M&A/PE group are definitely considered midlevels. Often them + a first year on even relatively large deals (part of this is because smaller group that is a little junior heavy).

It has made me worried because I clerked for a year, and now have had a very slow 2nd (first at firm) year because of COVID, so absolutely not ready to do the work I see third years doing running large parts of a deal.

I think I've probably seen over a hundred M&A deals (between bid processes, add ons, etc.). I've only seen one third year run an M&A deal (I mean run, not be the most senior associate on the deal, but actually be acting as a junior with a partner or counsel who is doing senior associate and partner work at the same time). She was extremely good for a third year. She, unsurprisingly, missed some significant structure issues, caused some significant delays and broke down crying on a call. I felt really bad because it was wildly inappropriate to put a third year in that position.

I guess, at least in my experience, no third year actually runs an M&A deal, and if they think they are, they don't know what good 5/6 years are doing. That being said, I have certainly met tons of third years who say they are running deals or act like midlevels. But, when I have seen what they are doing on deals, they certainly weren't acting like a midlevel.

Lol - this exactly

[bob311]

I know of very few firms where a third year is midlevel.

I doubt that there are any, despite the fervent protestations of second and third years in this thread

I've wondered about this. At my firm, we refer to 3rd years as midlevels, at least in the corporate group. In fact, I'm speaking on a panel during orientation for the new class and it's labeled as "advice from midlevels to juniors." I'm a third year.

We also generally view 5th years as seniors. Not sure if that's the case at other firms, too.

I’m at a high end lit boutique and 3rd year is definitely midlevel here. We have a 6ish year partnership track so it’s 1-2 years junior, 3-4 years midlevel, and 5-6/7 as a senior. A 3rd year at my boutique is expected to have argued in court, taken depositions, and run clients (at least by the end of ones 3rd year). But we are a lit boutique, we don’t have the associate bloat where a junior or midlevel can hide for much longer than a month or two before it’s painfully obvious they aren’t a good fit.