Top Law Schools

What advice would you give for first year associates starting BigLaw remote? I.e. has covid/WFH changed the dynamic? Also, general advice for how to succeed as a first year is welcome.

I am a bit shocked biglaw would allow that for first year, even with covid. GodSpeed,

I thought basically all biglaw classes were starting remote this year.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 11:11 am

I am a bit shocked biglaw would allow that for first year, even with covid. GodSpeed,

I'm 3 weeks into my remote start at a V10. The remote start has honestly been great. I get to wear PJs 90% of the day, don't have to worry about FaceTime, and I can just manage my matters/work in peace.

My only advice is to not reach out for work right away if you're in a firm that assigns work or in a firm that is free market and super busy. It'll come to you. Plus, it's your stub year, so your hours aren't going to be under a ton of scrutiny. Just let people know you exist and that you're friendly, and that's good enough. The first few weeks are super useful for setting up your email properly, doing orientation/HR mumbo jumbo, navigating the DMS/redline tools, and watching some practice-specific training content on your firms intranet.

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 11:30 am

I thought basically all biglaw classes were starting remote this year.

It will interesting to see how that plays out is I suppose a better way to word it. The PJs reference of the other poster is a crack into the canvas of why. May be fine for most. But, I've know first year hires that THINK they are more prepared than they are. Hopefully for posters it goes great though.

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I think there are already a couple of threads on this topic, but I would think the two hardest things while working from home would be (1) building relationships and (2) staying at the front of people's minds.

Building relationships may be a little harder when you're not in the office, but really it's just about caring and effort. If an associate reaches out to you telling you that you can ask them for advice, then...ask them for advice! Even if you think you know what you're doing, take it as a chance to connect with someone. Think about how you probably have strong relationships with folks that you don't see a lot in real life. What keeps those relationships strong? Some work relationships will come naturally because you work together all the time, but some may need more effort. Not everyone needs to be your best friend, but if you put in even a little effort you'll be in a much better place.

One the second point, some nervous younger associates wait for partners/senior associates to give them things and follow up with them (I was like this...still am sometimes!), but while everyone knows you aren't an expert on the law, you CAN be the expert on where the documents are, what is owed to the client, when the partner needs to review, and following up with the partner after to make sure the issue is resolved. These aren't necessarily legal skills - just people management skills, but you may not have had to do them before. If you prove to be reliable - not just because you do good work, but because you are on top of what's happening - then partners will trust you with more, and you'll become an important member of the team.

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:22 pm

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I get that you don't get it, but that only adds depth to the problem to be fully honest. Thus the rest of the phrasing that went with it. Like said, hope it goes fine for them. Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed that alone proves the problem.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 4:24 pm

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:22 pm

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I get that you don't get it, but that only adds depth to the problem to be fully honest. Thus the rest of the phrasing that went with it. Like said, hope it goes fine for them. Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed that alone proves the problem.

How about you stop posting anon and actually articulate the problems you had with that statement rather than hand waving vaguely about them?

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 4:24 pm

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:22 pm

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I get that you don't get it, but that only adds depth to the problem to be fully honest. Thus the rest of the phrasing that went with it. Like said, hope it goes fine for them. Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed that alone proves the problem.

We don't get it because you're incoherent bruh

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 4:24 pm

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:22 pm

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I get that you don't get it, but that only adds depth to the problem to be fully honest. Thus the rest of the phrasing that went with it. Like said, hope it goes fine for them. Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed that alone proves the problem.

Go home. You’re drunk.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 4:24 pm

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:22 pm

I don’t get what the reference to PJs is supposed to suggest. Are you saying that someone who starts remotely at a biglaw firm isn’t going to be able to figure out that they can’t actually wear PJs to the office, or that if they wear PJs while WFH there are going to be negative consequences?

I get that you don't get it, but that only adds depth to the problem to be fully honest. Thus the rest of the phrasing that went with it. Like said, hope it goes fine for them. Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed that alone proves the problem.

“Sometimes if a thing needs spoon fed”

To be or not to be, that is the question. Guess you went with not “to be.”

Yea I don't get the whole PJ comment. The real difficulty of remote is building personal relationships and trust with colleagues in my mind.

I love it so far. I really don't miss things like bumping into people and having awkward small talk at the coffee machine, tbh. I'm in a fairly small (and currently incredibly busy) group, so I'm hoping I'll be able to build relationships just through working with the same people.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 05, 2020 9:51 pm

I love it so far. I really don't miss things like bumping into people and having awkward small talk at the coffee machine, tbh. I'm in a fairly small (and currently incredibly busy) group, so I'm hoping I'll be able to build relationships just through working with the same people.

Accidental anon