Dealing with first years who don't *get it* Forum

[Anonymous User]

For context: Mid/senior level in a biglaw corporate group in NYC

Apologies for the rant here, but I've been beyond frustrated with WFH. I work with a handful of first years and due to some combination of remote work and general entitlement / bad attitude issues I've had a tough time dealing with them. I've had to deal with typical first-year issues (e.g. shoddy work product, blown deadlines, general confusion) which I expect and can handle, but it's the general lack-of-giving-a-fuck that has been getting to me. I try to be as reasonable as possible with deadlines, divvying up work, explaining things, etc. but they consistently find ways to screw things up. I'll generally just try to deal with it on my own, fix their drafts, make changes, etc. while also sending emails and hopping on calls to explain what I'm doing but I'm lucky if I even get a response. This isn't my first time managing people either - I've never had issues like this in the past.

The real impetus for this whole post is a *partner* called me today saying that a first year complained that I wasn't letting her work on substantive enough work. This person, to be clear, picks up the phone maybe 1/10 times I call her, consistently blows deadlines with poor work, and has done absolutely nothing to make me think she deserves to work on anything, let alone "substantive material."

I guess my question here is at what point do you throw someone under the bus? They're clearly not receptive to feedback from me, but I also don't want to derail someone's entire career if they're just not used to typical biglaw expectations. Basically - how do I reach these kids?

[2013]

Throw her under the bus. She complained to the partner about you. She lost any goodwill she had.

[CanadianWolf]

Seems as though WFH doesn't work for first year associates. Communication & expectation issues.

[Anonymous User]

Telling a partner that someone’s work isn’t good after she complains she’s not getting senior enough work isn’t throwing her under the bus.

I don’t know your firm culture, but I would call her and let her know that you haven’t given her more work because she hasn’t done a good job. Have concrete examples (I asked you to send me a diligence report on Tuesday night and you send it Thursday after I followed up on Wednesday morning...you spelled the CEO’s name wrong on all the signature pages...etc).

I’ve had this go over like a lead balloon (and once had an associate tell me “they weren’t a typical second year” and they “needed me to take some culpability for what happened”). But I got some terrible summer associate reviews because my work was sloppy and it was a wake up call that I fixed.

[Anonymous User]

Are you at Davis Poke?

[Elston Gunn]

I assume the partner rolled their eyes all the way into the back of their head when they got this phone call and already has formed a negative opinion of the first year, but obviously you didn’t provide any details of how that call went. Agree with others that it’s not throwing the associate under the bus to just tell the truth at this point, though I don’t know you need to affirmatively bring it up. Also agree that it makes sense to explain to the first year why they haven’t proven themselves worthy of more substantive work.

[Anonymous User]

I don't even know what life looks like if you're confident/cavalier/cocky enough to complain to a partner about not getting sufficiently advanced work as a first year. Maybe this first year is reacting to the drudgery of lots of first year work, which I get, but this is a good way to get a lot of bad will. You have to remain professional, but it seems perfectly fine to me to tell the partner that the request is a bit unreasonable to begin with, but also unreasonable from this person in particular, given that they haven't inspired any confidence they could handle more complex work yet.

[blair.waldorf]

Seems as though WFH doesn't work for first year associates. Communication & expectation issues.

WFH has been fantastic for me so far, and it’s a bummer that some first years are ruining it for the rest of us.

[Anonymous User]

I got to think that if you are dealing with *multiple* problematic first years, the problem is likely you or something bigger in the firm. Like if its just one person, then its probably them. But if its a handful, that seems to signal bigger issues. Does your general management style usually work for first years, just not this year because of remote? Is the firm sending first years mixed messages about what type of work to expect or something?

[FedFan123]

These damn kids, they had more respect for their elders back in my day

[Dcc617]

Have you actually talked to any of these people about your problems with them?

[Anonymous User]

For context: Mid/senior level in a biglaw corporate group in NYC

Apologies for the rant here, but I've been beyond frustrated with WFH. I work with a handful of first years and due to some combination of remote work and general entitlement / bad attitude issues I've had a tough time dealing with them. I've had to deal with typical first-year issues (e.g. shoddy work product, blown deadlines, general confusion) which I expect and can handle, but it's the general lack-of-giving-a-fuck that has been getting to me. I try to be as reasonable as possible with deadlines, divvying up work, explaining things, etc. but they consistently find ways to screw things up. I'll generally just try to deal with it on my own, fix their drafts, make changes, etc. while also sending emails and hopping on calls to explain what I'm doing but I'm lucky if I even get a response. This isn't my first time managing people either - I've never had issues like this in the past.

The real impetus for this whole post is a *partner* called me today saying that a first year complained that I wasn't letting her work on substantive enough work. This person, to be clear, picks up the phone maybe 1/10 times I call her, consistently blows deadlines with poor work, and has done absolutely nothing to make me think she deserves to work on anything, let alone "substantive material."

I guess my question here is at what point do you throw someone under the bus? They're clearly not receptive to feedback from me, but I also don't want to derail someone's entire career if they're just not used to typical biglaw expectations. Basically - how do I reach these kids?

Just tell the partner what is really going on. I think I would have looped the partner in as soon as it became a consistent problem. Also tell that first year not to go around you ever again. That’s totally inappropriate.

[Anonymous User]

OP, have you directly told the first-year that what they are doing is not acceptable. I don't mean just giving feedback on written work to fix typos or saying things like "it's important to hit deadlines." I mean straight up, "You cannot miss my calls or ignore emails close to a deadline," or "I fixed your typos and formatting, but it has to be right the first time."

A lot of passive aggressive feedback gets lost in WFH. But, if you have already made these things clear and there is no doubt, I agree that it makes sense to call the person out.

[Anonymous User]

If you're feeling nice, I would just tell the associate this is their last straw and if they do it again you'll burn them. be as direct with them as you can. one day they'll be grateful you did this, instead of a partner.

[Anonymous User]

I got to think that if you are dealing with *multiple* problematic first years, the problem is likely you or something bigger in the firm. Like if its just one person, then its probably them. But if its a handful, that seems to signal bigger issues. Does your general management style usually work for first years, just not this year because of remote? Is the firm sending first years mixed messages about what type of work to expect or something?

Not OP, but I would respectfully disagree here. If people are blowing deadlines, they’re blowing deadlines. It’s not that crazy to me to think that the first ever WFH class of associates could experience new growing pains. There’s nothing like in person feedback and discussion over an assignment, and a stern tone could be lost over an email exchange.

[Wild Card]

"This person, to be clear, picks up the phone maybe 1/10 times I call her, consistently blows deadlines with poor work"

This is not at all normal, and you don't have to, but should, make it clear.

I think freezing this person out altogether is not appropriate until you've communicated that there are serious problems that need addressing, and unless the the person remedies the problems immediately.

[Anonymous User]

"This person, to be clear, picks up the phone maybe 1/10 times I call her, consistently blows deadlines with poor work"

This is not at all normal, and you don't have to, but should, make it clear.

I think freezing this person out altogether is not appropriate until you've communicated that there are serious problems that need addressing, and unless the the person remedies the problems immediately.

The entire model is predicated on 1st years doing process-oriented work to allow midlevels and seniors to handle the substantive stuff, and in that arrangement the midlevel/senior tries to provide "soft" training -- ways to manage up, send good emails, etc. and doesn't throw the 1st year under the bus but at the same time the 1st year accepts that they're responsible for a lot of nonsubstantive work.

Once they step outside that arrangement and torches the senior -- when, as OP mentions, they're covering for the 1st year, not letting the partner see everything under the hood -- OP doesn't have to cover for them anymore.

[avenuem]

As one of the greatest first-years on the planet, I realize I could be projecting my first-in-class work ethic onto other first-years when I say it's hard to imagine any first year regularly missing deadlines and not answering calls. First years aren't perfect, but rare (I hope) is the first year dumb enough to ignore a senior associate's request and calls. So I want to dispel once and for all this fiction percolating ITT that first years writ large are not capable of working from home. We are. Some might be entitled, but I agree with the poster who suggested that this could be a you problem OP. There might be something about you that's causing the disrespect.

Having said that, it's one thing to call a partner to tell them good work on the memo they sent a client, it's another thing to call them to complain about a midlevel/senior. The second would draw my wrath if I were you and the first year would be out, statistic.

[Anonymous User]

WFH is definitely tougher on first years. If they joined the firm in the fall and they only "know" you from phone calls and emails in which you ask them to do the bullshit work that first years do, they will probably resent you at least subconsciously. Good managers build rapport with people who report to them - and WFH makes that extremely difficult.

I'm certainly not justifying a 1st year who ignores your calls and then goes over your head - that is absolutely behavior worth throwing under the bus - but I had to come to this realization myself back in October, too. I was full speed ahead on WFH, firing off emails with assignments and setting up occasional calls and I realized that this must be really tough on these new folks who had most of their (limited) informal feedback opportunities taken away.

[Wild Card]

The entire model is predicated on 1st years doing process-oriented work to allow midlevels and seniors to handle the substantive stuff, and in that arrangement the midlevel/senior tries to provide "soft" training -- ways to manage up, send good emails, etc. and doesn't throw the 1st year under the bus but at the same time the 1st year accepts that they're responsible for a lot of nonsubstantive work.

Once they step outside that arrangement and torches the senior -- when, as OP mentions, they're covering for the 1st year, not letting the partner see everything under the hood -- OP doesn't have to cover for them anymore.

Some people are arrogant, incompetent, and entitled; others lack common sense; others simply don't know better. It is an act of kindness to knock some sense into the thickheaded.

Our conversation reminds me of this unflattering article, which Google has memoryholed:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2008/ ... o-law-firm

But Michelle could also frustrate her supervisors. Quincy White, the partner who helped recruit Michelle and who headed the marketing group, remembers finding her a challenge to manage. White, who is now retired from the firm, says he gave her the most interesting work he could find, in part because he wanted to see her advance, but also because she seemed perennially dissatisfied.

...

Too monotonous for Michelle, who, White says, complained that the work he gave her was unsatisfactory. He says he gave her the Coors beer ads, which he considered one of the more glamorous assignments they had. Even then, he says, “she at one point went over my head and complained [to human resources] that I wasn’t giving her enough interesting stuff, and the person came down to my office and said, ‘Basically she’s complaining that she’s being treated like she’s a second-year associate,’ and we agreed that she was a second-year associate. I had eight or nine other associates, and I couldn’t start treating one of them a lot better.”

...

“Not many people went over my head,” says White. It was an unusual move for a young associate to make, and he believes it was consistent with her personality.

[Anonymous User]

I mean, I would be honest with the partner about what's going on. Say you'd love to give them more work, but frankly they aren't always reachable and occasionally there are issues that indicate they need closer supervision on the assignments.

[Anonymous User]

Also a mid-level and I would be pissed if that happened. WFH or not, first-years need to realize that much of what they do is monotonous BS. The advice I was given as a first-year is to learn and add value where you can. Missing calls (and not calling back) or missing deadlines is completely unacceptable. We are paid to be available 24/7 which of course sucks sometimes but is reality. Fortunately, I haven’t been in your position but I would say something to the partner and try to avoid working with said first-year as much as possible. I would also clearly outline expectations for every first year I work with. Much of this is common sense, but some people still blow the obvious things.

[jarofsoup]

The attitude issue is the real issue. I have worked with first years that do not do good work but they try hard and have a good attitude. A lot will learn and get better and it pays off.

The attitude is the issue

[CanadianWolf]

It is hard to imagine a justification for a first year ignoring 9 of 10 calls from anyone in her firm. And, apparently, there was none as the first year would have communicated any justified concern to the partner when complaining about the mid/senior associate.

[Dcc617]

You can also just send an email? Biglaw is weird about people being expected to answer random unexpected calls whenever the mood strikes some random mid-level.