Lateraling up- is it worth it? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am a first year in an in-demand corporate group (think CapM/M&A) in a v50 in NY. I have been pretty busy since I started and received very positive reviews, and people have generally been respectful of my weekends to the extent possible (so far annualizing ~2050 hours; not that slow but def not crazy). Today I got an offer from the same group from a v10 which is obviously one of the best in terms of the practice group, and I understand how much busier it’s going to be. My question is, would it be worth it to trade up to get better exits and potentially fewer years in biglaw? Goal is in-house.

Thanks in advance for any insight.

[hdr]

If you're happy at your current firm (good people, reasonable workload, acceptable compensation, etc.) I don't think it's worth lateraling just to move up the Vault ranks. You could end up being miserable at the new firm.

[Jchance]

people have generally been respectful of my weekends to the extent possible

Definitely not worth it.

[Raiden]

If your comp is the same, then I think prestige alone may not be a good enough reason. Also depends on the vibes you got from the interview and speaking to other associates. Sounds like you have a good gig at a respectable enough place that you likely could still meet your goals of going in-house with sanity intact.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks all for the advice so far. My main problem with my current group is that we have no support staff and I usually end up doing a lot of paralegal work as juniors. Was wondering if someone could confirm it would be the same in v10s?

[hdr]

Thanks all for the advice so far. My main problem with my current group is that we have no support staff and I usually end up doing a lot of paralegal work as juniors. Was wondering if someone could confirm it would be the same in v10s?

If you're not billing much above 2000 why does it matter if you do paralegal work? IMO it's great when you can use low-level work to hit your hours as long as you're getting good substantive experience as well. Doing paralegal work is more of a problem when you're billing 2500 or whatever and you don't have anyone to delegate to.

I think in general higher-ranked firms tend to have better support staff (and are run better in general), but it's not always true. In lateral interviews it's good to ask associates what they think about their support staff, IT, etc.

[attorney589753]

Thanks all for the advice so far. My main problem with my current group is that we have no support staff and I usually end up doing a lot of paralegal work as juniors. Was wondering if someone could confirm it would be the same in v10s?

A common in-house path is working for a few clients that grow to love you. That's probably going to be easier at your current firm than if you switch to a new one, need to figure out the right clients to work with, need to build your reputation with them, etc. A V10 compared to a V50 probably only matters for in-house folks at a select few places — anyone who hires you based on connections will know you are a great lawyer already. I would stay put and use your reputation to steer towards clients and deals that you think fit into your long term plans. You never know what will turn into the right opportunity but being able to control the shots is pretty valuable

[Anonymous User]

Thanks all for the advice so far. My main problem with my current group is that we have no support staff and I usually end up doing a lot of paralegal work as juniors. Was wondering if someone could confirm it would be the same in v10s?

A common in-house path is working for a few clients that grow to love you. That's probably going to be easier at your current firm than if you switch to a new one, need to figure out the right clients to work with, need to build your reputation with them, etc. A V10 compared to a V50 probably only matters for in-house folks at a select few places — anyone who hires you based on connections will know you are a great lawyer already. I would stay put and use your reputation to steer towards clients and deals that you think fit into your long term plans. You never know what will turn into the right opportunity but being able to control the shots is pretty valuable

Thank you for this. One of the reasons I am not happy with my group right now is that we get very cost-conscious clients and, as juniors, I almost always don't get invited to calls with client, and sometimes the midlevels will even leave me off the email chains. i just feel like if I stay put it will take a lot longer for me to even build the relationship with the client?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks all for the advice so far. My main problem with my current group is that we have no support staff and I usually end up doing a lot of paralegal work as juniors. Was wondering if someone could confirm it would be the same in v10s?

If you're not billing much above 2000 why does it matter if you do paralegal work? IMO it's great when you can use low-level work to hit your hours as long as you're getting good substantive experience as well. Doing paralegal work is more of a problem when you're billing 2500 or whatever and you don't have anyone to delegate to.

I think in general higher-ranked firms tend to have better support staff (and are run better in general), but it's not always true. In lateral interviews it's good to ask associates what they think about their support staff, IT, etc.

That is very true and I will make sure to talk to more associates. Thank you!

[crouton62]

If you're on Scott Barshay's team at PW or whatever, the clients may not care as much about the costs, so juniors may get to listen in on all conference calls, but it's not like they are building meaningful client relationships through that. If your clients are as cost-conscious as you say, I bet your midlevels do a lot more heavy lifting on deals and interface with clients more so than the midlevels on Barshay's team.

I agree with the other advice given above. Don't leave for the V10 just for the chance to get to listen in on all conference calls as a junior. Seems like you may be in a short term pain, mid/long term gain kinda situation.

[Anonymous User]

If you're on Scott Barshay's team at PW or whatever, the clients may not care as much about the costs, so juniors may get to listen in on all conference calls, but it's not like they are building meaningful client relationships through that. If your clients are as cost-conscious as you say, I bet your midlevels do a lot more heavy lifting on deals and interface with clients more so than the midlevels on Barshay's team.

I agree with the other advice given above. Don't leave for the V10 just for the chance to get to listen in on all conference calls as a junior. Seems like you may be in a short term pain, mid/long term gain kinda situation.

Wow this is great advice. Haven't thought about it this way. Thanks!!

[screwtapeletters]

I have many friends who did just that and regretted it when they went from low2000s to mid- high- 2000s for the same type of work just with higher $$$$ attached which doesn’t mean much ($300m deal vs $20b deal as a junior doesn’t make much of a difference; arguably not much at midlevel either. In fact you may get more responsibility earlier in the former scenario that may be more substantive and relevant).

It sounds like you have very reasonable hours at a solid firm with good folks to work with. I’d say just stay put, put in another 2 years or so, and when you are super marketable then and you still feel that way, go for that V10 then ‘cause you will be able to get at least one offer. And if you come to hate the V10, you sure can jump inhouse at that point using both the substantive experiences you’ve gained at V50 and the “prestige” factor from a V10.

[glitched]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

[Anonymous User]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

Thank you. Not Kirkland but another shop that does not hire laterals often; that’s why I’m so tempted because I feel like I might miss the chance to lateral up once the covid boom in deal work is over. Open to be corrected, of course!

[Bdgerald]

If you're already working a ton at your current firm and/or you don't like the people you work with, then absolutely it's worth it to move up.

No guarantee that higher "ranked" firm is a better place to work though. As a junior especially, you may end up with less responsibility.

[legalpotato]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

Thank you. Not Kirkland but another shop that does not hire laterals often; that’s why I’m so tempted because I feel like I might miss the chance to lateral up once the covid boom in deal work is over. Open to be corrected, of course!

yeah, we all believe you it is not kirkland....

[2013]

OP, if you’re at Shearman, I would stay. The firm is struggling a bit, but it’s still a good firm for corporate. You won’t be there long enough for any collapse. And the firm will always match market without an hours minimum, which is absurd but whatever.

[Anonymous User]

OP, if you’re at Shearman, I would stay. The firm is struggling a bit, but it’s still a good firm for corporate. You won’t be there long enough for any collapse. And the firm will always match market without an hours minimum, which is absurd but whatever.

What does it mean to not have an hours minimum? Like is it that better or worse in the same way people thought "unlimited vacation" would be great but turns out not to be..

[NewSouthernAssociate]

You should also think about the timing of when you want to go in-house. Although the lateral market is hot now, I wouldn’t necessarily count on multiple lateral moves. If you are trying to save up a certain amount of money before you go in-house (e.g., after 4-5 years), then that means you might have to suffer at the V10 billing lots of hours for longer. Therefore, I’d probably stay at your firm for at least another year.

[Anonymous User]

Some thoughts:
1.) Time in BigLaw matters. A fifth year v50 M&A associate will have significantly better exit ops than a second year v10 M&A associate. To the extent you 1.) like your group and 2.) aren't smashed for hours, staying at your (seemingly happy?) place seems like a wise play.
2.) There are a few ways to build relationships. The most appealing is the 1:1 work, and you can start doing that as a midlevel. However, you can also just ... reach out to people you're on calls with at approximately a similar level. Getting to know random IB associates now can really bear fruit 2-3 years down the line when they go in-house wherever.
3.) IMO listening in on calls is actually super valuable. You figure out what clients do (and don't) care about, how to communicate with them, how to negotiate, etc - super super useful "soft skills."
4.) There are two ways to get recruited. One is through someone who knows you and will vouch for you; then it doesn't really matter where you worked. The other is the cold-application way, there it matters a great deal where you worked, what your deal sheet looks like, etc - that's because you'll have non-lawyers with the first crack at your resume, and those are the kind of people who will just look at vault and from that alone decide if you're a "good" lawyer or not.
5.) The "responsibility or clout" conversation goes on a lot. TCR, I think, is that years in the profession matters a lot more than is fair - so even if you are a third year at your v100 basically running the APA, most in-house places will just not look at your until you're a fifth-ish year for the nice roles. (See point 1).

Stepping back a bit, what I'm really trying to get at is that if you are in-house recruiting without a connection to the firm, HR is dumb as a rock. They look at your years in BigLaw, your vault ranking, and the names on your deal sheet ("major household name," "20bn enterprise value," etc) to decide if you're a good lawyer or not. I don't think anyone would say those are smart ways to evaluate a lawyer, but it's what you need to pitch to when thinking about this plan.

Re: no hours minimum. I think unlimited vacations are a scam, but no hours minimum is really nice. There's an understanding of what you need to bill, it just prevents a lot of nickle-and-dime shit at the end of the year (someone who billed 1993.1 doesn't get a bonus, someone who billed 2000.4 does) and prevents a lot of the dumb stuff that can happen when everyone is just trying to hit hours.

[Anonymous User]

Unlimited vacation at my previous firm was definitely real (v20). Maybe it was just me, but I had no trouble going out 6-7 weeks of vacation total in a year for my last three years at that firm. As long as you had your deal teams' approvals and lined up your coverage, no one cared how many vacation days you take. I billed around 2000-2200 hours on average, though

[the lsat failure]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

Thank you. Not Kirkland but another shop that does not hire laterals often; that’s why I’m so tempted because I feel like I might miss the chance to lateral up once the covid boom in deal work is over. Open to be corrected, of course!

yeah, we all believe you it is not kirkland....

What's with the insistence? Pretty sure lots of other V10s are hiring right now.

Either way, I do think that the hot market is favorable for people looking to "lateral up." The question is whether or not you're willing to put up with the BS that comes with being a junior at a V10 as opposed to the job you have right now, which seems very reasonable. Going in house is largely a function of your connections and/or your outside hustle to find a gig; if you have the requisite experience, I hardly think that the V10 on your resume will be the dealbreaker.

[Anonymous User]

Some thoughts:
1.) Time in BigLaw matters. A fifth year v50 M&A associate will have significantly better exit ops than a second year v10 M&A associate. To the extent you 1.) like your group and 2.) aren't smashed for hours, staying at your (seemingly happy?) place seems like a wise play.
2.) There are a few ways to build relationships. The most appealing is the 1:1 work, and you can start doing that as a midlevel. However, you can also just ... reach out to people you're on calls with at approximately a similar level. Getting to know random IB associates now can really bear fruit 2-3 years down the line when they go in-house wherever.
3.) IMO listening in on calls is actually super valuable. You figure out what clients do (and don't) care about, how to communicate with them, how to negotiate, etc - super super useful "soft skills."
4.) There are two ways to get recruited. One is through someone who knows you and will vouch for you; then it doesn't really matter where you worked. The other is the cold-application way, there it matters a great deal where you worked, what your deal sheet looks like, etc - that's because you'll have non-lawyers with the first crack at your resume, and those are the kind of people who will just look at vault and from that alone decide if you're a "good" lawyer or not.
5.) The "responsibility or clout" conversation goes on a lot. TCR, I think, is that years in the profession matters a lot more than is fair - so even if you are a third year at your v100 basically running the APA, most in-house places will just not look at your until you're a fifth-ish year for the nice roles. (See point 1).

Stepping back a bit, what I'm really trying to get at is that if you are in-house recruiting without a connection to the firm, HR is dumb as a rock. They look at your years in BigLaw, your vault ranking, and the names on your deal sheet ("major household name," "20bn enterprise value," etc) to decide if you're a good lawyer or not. I don't think anyone would say those are smart ways to evaluate a lawyer, but it's what you need to pitch to when thinking about this plan.

Re: no hours minimum. I think unlimited vacations are a scam, but no hours minimum is really nice. There's an understanding of what you need to bill, it just prevents a lot of nickle-and-dime shit at the end of the year (someone who billed 1993.1 doesn't get a bonus, someone who billed 2000.4 does) and prevents a lot of the dumb stuff that can happen when everyone is just trying to hit hours.

Thank you so much for the detailed and insightful response especially on in house recruiting!!

[Anonymous User]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

Thank you. Not Kirkland but another shop that does not hire laterals often; that’s why I’m so tempted because I feel like I might miss the chance to lateral up once the covid boom in deal work is over. Open to be corrected, of course!

yeah, we all believe you it is not kirkland....

What's with the insistence? Pretty sure lots of other V10s are hiring right now.

Either way, I do think that the hot market is favorable for people looking to "lateral up." The question is whether or not you're willing to put up with the BS that comes with being a junior at a V10 as opposed to the job you have right now, which seems very reasonable. Going in house is largely a function of your connections and/or your outside hustle to find a gig; if you have the requisite experience, I hardly think that the V10 on your resume will be the dealbreaker.

Thank you! Yeah it does seem daunting just to think about the life of a v10 junior rn

[majasm89]

Don’t go to Kirkland. There’s a reason they are always hiring despite over market pay.

Probably because they keep doubling their market share in PE M&A every year?