Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article Forum

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:54 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:29 pm
Also, gotta stop letting them get away with promoting that "share partner consideration track is shorter now!" thing. It's like saying you're an A student because you got one and then 20 B-minuses; just very bad-faith.

And even if it were true...it basically serves to defend allegations that the firm caters exclusively to rainmakers by bragging about how quickly it's trying to promote future rainmakers. Rightly or wrongly, it's pretty clear leadership is openly proud of many of the things the firm is "accused" of.
I don't understand this criticism. Nobody was denying that under the prior track that only the superstars would get shares. Now they're getting it at 3 years instead of 4. Non-superstars weren't getting shares under either track anyways. While not earth shattering, it's still an overall plus for those gunning for shares.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Feb 17, 2022 11:40 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:00 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:37 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 6:52 pm
this kills me. incoming K&E SA here and it was so obvious they told associates in the interviews to stress that they are "not a sweat shop" in interviews because it came up repeatedly in every firm interaction I had
Yeah I wouldn't start worrying. Its likely that you didn't turn down Cravath for Kirkland, so you probably would have ended up going to another firm with similar prestrige and work load. Just enjoy your summer aka paid vacation.
Lots of people with Cravath offers (and many more with Cravath numbers) pass on it for a Kirkland office outside NY.
Chiming in, I turned down a Cravath offer for Kirkland. Cravath's rotation system is terrible and discourages even a semblance of exploration of the law/your interests in it.
Same boat. Turned down Cravath for Kirkland NY. Mostly a gut decision.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Feb 17, 2022 11:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:00 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:37 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 6:52 pm
this kills me. incoming K&E SA here and it was so obvious they told associates in the interviews to stress that they are "not a sweat shop" in interviews because it came up repeatedly in every firm interaction I had
Yeah I wouldn't start worrying. Its likely that you didn't turn down Cravath for Kirkland, so you probably would have ended up going to another firm with similar prestrige and work load. Just enjoy your summer aka paid vacation.
Lots of people with Cravath offers (and many more with Cravath numbers) pass on it for a Kirkland office outside NY.
Chiming in, I turned down a Cravath offer for Kirkland. Cravath's rotation system is terrible and discourages even a semblance of exploration of the law/your interests in it.
Delete

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:04 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 11:40 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:00 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:37 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 6:52 pm
this kills me. incoming K&E SA here and it was so obvious they told associates in the interviews to stress that they are "not a sweat shop" in interviews because it came up repeatedly in every firm interaction I had
Yeah I wouldn't start worrying. Its likely that you didn't turn down Cravath for Kirkland, so you probably would have ended up going to another firm with similar prestrige and work load. Just enjoy your summer aka paid vacation.
Lots of people with Cravath offers (and many more with Cravath numbers) pass on it for a Kirkland office outside NY.
Chiming in, I turned down a Cravath offer for Kirkland. Cravath's rotation system is terrible and discourages even a semblance of exploration of the law/your interests in it.
Same boat. Turned down Cravath for Kirkland NY. Mostly a gut decision.
I know plenty of people who turned down Cravath for a “non-peer” firm based on the old guard’s standards (including myself), as well as people who left after a year because they realized it was a stupid decision in the first place.

The legal industry still puts them on a pedestal but it seems that their pedigree has lost a bit of its shine more recently.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:24 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 11:40 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:00 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:37 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 6:52 pm
this kills me. incoming K&E SA here and it was so obvious they told associates in the interviews to stress that they are "not a sweat shop" in interviews because it came up repeatedly in every firm interaction I had
Yeah I wouldn't start worrying. Its likely that you didn't turn down Cravath for Kirkland, so you probably would have ended up going to another firm with similar prestrige and work load. Just enjoy your summer aka paid vacation.
Lots of people with Cravath offers (and many more with Cravath numbers) pass on it for a Kirkland office outside NY.
Chiming in, I turned down a Cravath offer for Kirkland. Cravath's rotation system is terrible and discourages even a semblance of exploration of the law/your interests in it.
Same boat. Turned down Cravath for Kirkland NY. Mostly a gut decision.
I know plenty of people who turned down Cravath for a “non-peer” firm based on the old guard’s standards (including myself), as well as people who left after a year because they realized it was a stupid decision in the first place.

The legal industryNYC corporate lawyers, and a dwindling proportion of them at that, still puts them on a pedestal but it seems that their pedigree has lost a bit of its shine more recently.
Fixed. I'm no fan of Kirkland, but no one can deny that they've turned the industry on its head or argue with their earth-shattering profits, especially on the corp side. Who cares about CravaTTTh LOL.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 am

As a KE associate, I’m stuck that he doesn’t mention the attrition among us. The whole thing reads like a recruiting letter to rainmakers at other firms.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 8:15 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Here's a person who knows some stuff. It's always nice when someone who actually knows shit pops into these threads instead of arguing about whether Cravath or KE is better for the 2000000th time.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 8:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:54 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:29 pm
Also, gotta stop letting them get away with promoting that "share partner consideration track is shorter now!" thing. It's like saying you're an A student because you got one and then 20 B-minuses; just very bad-faith.

And even if it were true...it basically serves to defend allegations that the firm caters exclusively to rainmakers by bragging about how quickly it's trying to promote future rainmakers. Rightly or wrongly, it's pretty clear leadership is openly proud of many of the things the firm is "accused" of.
I don't understand this criticism. Nobody was denying that under the prior track that only the superstars would get shares. Now they're getting it at 3 years instead of 4. Non-superstars weren't getting shares under either track anyways. While not earth shattering, it's still an overall plus for those gunning for shares.
The criticism is that Kirkland is trying to promote the change from a 10 yr. to a 9 yr. track as a "see, associates, you're not a slave cog in a machine, we really do value you, you're definitely considered a future part of our collective partnership, we're a team!" When in reality, as everyone in this thread is acknowledging, it was mostly just a retention move to avoid poaching of a small cohort of (mostly transactional) "superstars" already clearly on the path to equity by year 8 (a minority within a minority). If Kirkland called it what it was no one would be complaining. But they're trying to spin it as something it's not.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 11:14 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 8:15 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Here's a person who knows some stuff. It's always nice when someone who actually knows shit pops into these threads instead of arguing about whether Cravath or KE is better for the 2000000th time.
Answer: none of the above

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 8:54 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:54 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:29 pm
Also, gotta stop letting them get away with promoting that "share partner consideration track is shorter now!" thing. It's like saying you're an A student because you got one and then 20 B-minuses; just very bad-faith.

And even if it were true...it basically serves to defend allegations that the firm caters exclusively to rainmakers by bragging about how quickly it's trying to promote future rainmakers. Rightly or wrongly, it's pretty clear leadership is openly proud of many of the things the firm is "accused" of.
I don't understand this criticism. Nobody was denying that under the prior track that only the superstars would get shares. Now they're getting it at 3 years instead of 4. Non-superstars weren't getting shares under either track anyways. While not earth shattering, it's still an overall plus for those gunning for shares.
The criticism is that Kirkland is trying to promote the change from a 10 yr. to a 9 yr. track as a "see, associates, you're not a slave cog in a machine, we really do value you, you're definitely considered a future part of our collective partnership, we're a team!" When in reality, as everyone in this thread is acknowledging, it was mostly just a retention move to avoid poaching of a small cohort of (mostly transactional) "superstars" already clearly on the path to equity by year 8 (a minority within a minority). If Kirkland called it what it was no one would be complaining. But they're trying to spin it as something it's not.
Tbh, when everyone itt knows what they are really trying to do, how does it matter? If you can figure out what's going on, so can the NSPs. All firms try to spin stuff. That's just marketing fluff. For instance, no point sitting here criticizing all firms because they call themselves collegial when everyone knows they're not.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Having personally met and interacted with Andy (not as a KE associate or working underneath him) it is blatantly obvious both the email and stories about him are true. He has been the most preeminent example of a hardass biglaw partner I've ever encountered. I could not imagine actually working for him if you aren't the type of person who enjoys billing 2600+ a year.

For literally anyone out there thinking this article isn't a complete BS puff piece, realize that Andy Calder saying this is the biggest joke of them all. The only thing Andy or KE is going to collaborate on or help you out with is to have no life other than billing the most you physically can, and Andy would feel no hesitation in kicking you to the curb if you weren't billing high numbers.

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre

Gold
Posts: 2479
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Monochromatic Oeuvre » Fri Feb 18, 2022 1:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:23 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 8:54 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:54 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:29 pm
Also, gotta stop letting them get away with promoting that "share partner consideration track is shorter now!" thing. It's like saying you're an A student because you got one and then 20 B-minuses; just very bad-faith.

And even if it were true...it basically serves to defend allegations that the firm caters exclusively to rainmakers by bragging about how quickly it's trying to promote future rainmakers. Rightly or wrongly, it's pretty clear leadership is openly proud of many of the things the firm is "accused" of.
I don't understand this criticism. Nobody was denying that under the prior track that only the superstars would get shares. Now they're getting it at 3 years instead of 4. Non-superstars weren't getting shares under either track anyways. While not earth shattering, it's still an overall plus for those gunning for shares.
The criticism is that Kirkland is trying to promote the change from a 10 yr. to a 9 yr. track as a "see, associates, you're not a slave cog in a machine, we really do value you, you're definitely considered a future part of our collective partnership, we're a team!" When in reality, as everyone in this thread is acknowledging, it was mostly just a retention move to avoid poaching of a small cohort of (mostly transactional) "superstars" already clearly on the path to equity by year 8 (a minority within a minority). If Kirkland called it what it was no one would be complaining. But they're trying to spin it as something it's not.
Tbh, when everyone itt knows what they are really trying to do, how does it matter? If you can figure out what's going on, so can the NSPs. All firms try to spin stuff. That's just marketing fluff. For instance, no point sitting here criticizing all firms because they call themselves collegial when everyone knows they're not.
Right, K&E doesn't want people who are very quickly obviously future SPs getting poached, so they give themselves discretion to offer shares faster. This is a moderate win for who plainly has great options elsewhere but would prefer to immediately be SPs. I think everyone agrees on that. The point is that it's a benefit for a very, very small group of people, in the context of a criticism that the firm exclusively focuses on rainmakers at the detriment of everything and everyone else. That's not a net negative but it's unhelpful to 99% of associates and merits next to zero praise.

And of course every firm is bullshitting in their press releases, articles, OCI interviews, whatever. It should all be called out. I do it every time I hear about it, including my own firm. Every time you show not-K&E doing it, I'll do the same. Never let hucksters go unchallenged.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 4:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 am
As a KE associate, I’m stuck that he doesn’t mention the attrition among us. The whole thing reads like a recruiting letter to rainmakers at other firms.
He does mention the attrition, it’s because the Kirkland brand has become so powerful that other firms are poaching their talented and prestigious lawyers. It certainly has nothing to do with the culture or cuddly image in the rest of the article.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Feb 18, 2022 4:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 4:28 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 am
As a KE associate, I’m stuck that he doesn’t mention the attrition among us. The whole thing reads like a recruiting letter to rainmakers at other firms.
He does mention the attrition, it’s because the Kirkland brand has become so powerful that other firms are poaching their talented and prestigious lawyers. It certainly has nothing to do with the culture or cuddly image in the rest of the article.
What possessed him to agree to this article? Even worse if it was pitched. Does he think this is good PR? Because it is not.

This imo is the major diff between KE and other sweatshops. Maybe the actual experience is equivalent. But KE seems extra obvious to how things look/sound to normies. Other firms know to pretend. It's like the difference between a drunk who tried studiously not to slur his words and one who shows up with barf on his shirt.

keassociate2017

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:31 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by keassociate2017 » Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:55 pm

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:18 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 7:05 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 6:52 pm
this kills me. incoming K&E SA here and it was so obvious they told associates in the interviews to stress that they are "not a sweat shop" in interviews because it came up repeatedly in every firm interaction I had
Same. One of the lateral SPs that interviewed me said they were wary of the sharp elbows culture when moving to K&E and observed that for about a year but it's changed over the last 4-5 years apparently. Could, of course, be a sales pitch but they brought it up when I asked them the difference between their experience at the two firms.
Yeah yeah hopefully it has actually changed but I definitely got taunted by some attorneys "get ready for 2,500 hours lol!!" when I took the job. I guess the only thing is that I had the same phrase get echoed so many times in interviews it geeked me a little.
Hi y'all. Very excited that you are joining us this summer -- it's going to be super fun!
I will admit, I'm not sure how this site works (very reminiscent of College ACB though -- what a throwback and nice to know anon posting sites are still just a toxic place for people to spread fake news and gossip). I've been at K&E since I was a first year (now a fifth year) and I have never worked over 2500, other than in 2020 (I do debt finance, so it was a tough year). I generally am in the 2000 - 2300 range, and very well compensated for it. To the initial poster -- sorry you had repetitive interview conversations. I always prefer to talk about queso or my new puppy in my interviews, not work, but I can't interview everyone. And, I would also note, I think I do have sharp elbows, because I work out a lot (intervals and arms on the peloton K&E bought me last year for the most part). Toned forearms and biceps mean boney elbows -- whatchagonnado. Maybe y'all should get off these anon boards and reach out to K&E associates if you are concerned about work and culture. I think finding some folks that will mentor you is key at any firm -- it helps you feel like you are welcomed and have a path (and an ear to complain to when work is hard). I bet Uncle Kirkland will pick up the tab if you wanted to do lunch or coffee too.

keassociate2017

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:31 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by keassociate2017 » Mon Feb 28, 2022 1:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Having personally met and interacted with Andy (not as a KE associate or working underneath him) it is blatantly obvious both the email and stories about him are true. He has been the most preeminent example of a hardass biglaw partner I've ever encountered. I could not imagine actually working for him if you aren't the type of person who enjoys billing 2600+ a year.

For literally anyone out there thinking this article isn't a complete BS puff piece, realize that Andy Calder saying this is the biggest joke of them all. The only thing Andy or KE is going to collaborate on or help you out with is to have no life other than billing the most you physically can, and Andy would feel no hesitation in kicking you to the curb if you weren't billing high numbers.
Hi! I actually know Andy Calder and have known him well since I was a 2L in law school (now a fifth year here at K&E Houston). Andy is actually a hilarious and great leader, and he cares about his associates. Personally, he made sure I got a month off when my dad had a stroke when I was a first year. The whole firm rallied around me too at that time. I also have never billed 2600 -- the most I have ever billed was like 2450 or something in 2020.

I've never looked at this site before, and I think it's super reminiscent of College ACB circa 2011 (which was just as toxic and fake as this seems to be). I guess my point is -- I don't appreciate you anonymously talking about my firm via your little anon accounts. I mean -- who are all of you? My name is Michelle Williamson, and I think anon posting in your little lair hunched over your little laptop / cell is super weird. Do you feel better bad mouthing my law firm and the head of my office? Maybe you should try taking your aggression out via workout or cooking dinner or something. And if you have an issue with Andy, and you don't even work here, I'm not sure why your opinion even matters or why you feel the need to opine.

To any of the K&E incoming associates or summer associates -- feel free to reach out if you have any questions from a legitimate associate at Kirkland that isn't trying to hide behind an American Psycho profile pic or other fake account. And I am happy to put you in touch with folks in another office or practice group too (I do debt finance). I think something that will help you all as you launch your careers is finding people at K&E to mentor and just be your friend -- I have met some of the best friends and mentors here during the last 4 years.

Cheers,
Michelle

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:42 pm

keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 1:31 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Having personally met and interacted with Andy (not as a KE associate or working underneath him) it is blatantly obvious both the email and stories about him are true. He has been the most preeminent example of a hardass biglaw partner I've ever encountered. I could not imagine actually working for him if you aren't the type of person who enjoys billing 2600+ a year.

For literally anyone out there thinking this article isn't a complete BS puff piece, realize that Andy Calder saying this is the biggest joke of them all. The only thing Andy or KE is going to collaborate on or help you out with is to have no life other than billing the most you physically can, and Andy would feel no hesitation in kicking you to the curb if you weren't billing high numbers.
Hi! I actually know Andy Calder and have known him well since I was a 2L in law school (now a fifth year here at K&E Houston). Andy is actually a hilarious and great leader, and he cares about his associates. Personally, he made sure I got a month off when my dad had a stroke when I was a first year. The whole firm rallied around me too at that time. I also have never billed 2600 -- the most I have ever billed was like 2450 or something in 2020.

I've never looked at this site before, and I think it's super reminiscent of College ACB circa 2011 (which was just as toxic and fake as this seems to be). I guess my point is -- I don't appreciate you anonymously talking about my firm via your little anon accounts. I mean -- who are all of you? My name is Michelle Williamson, and I think anon posting in your little lair hunched over your little laptop / cell is super weird. Do you feel better bad mouthing my law firm and the head of my office? Maybe you should try taking your aggression out via workout or cooking dinner or something. And if you have an issue with Andy, and you don't even work here, I'm not sure why your opinion even matters or why you feel the need to opine.

To any of the K&E incoming associates or summer associates -- feel free to reach out if you have any questions from a legitimate associate at Kirkland that isn't trying to hide behind an American Psycho profile pic or other fake account. And I am happy to put you in touch with folks in another office or practice group too (I do debt finance). I think something that will help you all as you launch your careers is finding people at K&E to mentor and just be your friend -- I have met some of the best friends and mentors here during the last 4 years.

Cheers,
Michelle
I really thought this was satirical until I googled the name and realized an individual by the name of Michelle Williamson indeed works at K&E Houston.

"I don't appreciate you anonymously talking about my firm via your little anon accounts" lmao

Image

K&E haters. This is your moment. Stop hiding. Also, the American Psycho profile pic call out :dead:

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Sackboy

Silver
Posts: 1041
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 2:14 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Sackboy » Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:48 pm

This is not a twist I ever expected, but I hope we get some real fireworks out of it.

thisismytlsuername

Bronze
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:22 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by thisismytlsuername » Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:51 pm

This can't be real, but if it is, it's all incredible. This is subtly my favorite part though:
keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:55 pm
I've been at K&E since I was a first year (now a fifth year) and I have never worked over 2500, other than in 2020 (I do debt finance, so it was a tough year). I generally am in the 2000 - 2300 range, and very well compensated for it.
Aka, I have worked 4 full years here, one of them was over 2500, the rest were in a wide range (and the lowest one is likely from a year in which I took month of family leave). Not exactly helping with these numbers. Also, if the range was really 2000-2300, then she would have said "one of them was over 2300." Sounds like more than one was over 2300.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:19 pm

Sackboy wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:48 pm
This is not a twist I ever expected, but I hope we get some real fireworks out of it.
+1

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:20 pm

thisismytlsuername wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:51 pm
This can't be real, but if it is, it's all incredible. This is subtly my favorite part though:
keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:55 pm
I've been at K&E since I was a first year (now a fifth year) and I have never worked over 2500, other than in 2020 (I do debt finance, so it was a tough year). I generally am in the 2000 - 2300 range, and very well compensated for it.
Aka, I have worked 4 full years here, one of them was over 2500, the rest were in a wide range (and the lowest one is likely from a year in which I took month of family leave). Not exactly helping with these numbers.
Michelle here. I honestly do not track my numbers and some years are busier than others, obviously. I could pull up my hours reports for each month and relay to you, but (i) I would rather finish working so I can go walk with my husband then make dinner (thinking sea bass tonight) and (ii) I don't think that's any of your business. To note, I thought I was 2500 in 2020, but it looks like I was 2450 -- either way, what a horrible year (plus, I had to do restructurings instead of new money financings -- yuck!). Here's what I can tell you -- if you come to Kirkland & Ellis, you are going to work a lot, just like you are going to do at any top tier law firm. That said, we let people take on responsibility and lead work streams early -- which is great because it makes you a great attorney that can close a deal in a pinch. That is one of my favorite things about this firm, along with the people and the *perks*.

I really do need to jump on a conference call now (and I am so annoyed my coworker / friend sent me this site -- what a time suck!), but very nice talking to y'all!

Cheers,
Michelle

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


legalpotato

Bronze
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 3:00 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by legalpotato » Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:21 pm

keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 1:31 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Having personally met and interacted with Andy (not as a KE associate or working underneath him) it is blatantly obvious both the email and stories about him are true. He has been the most preeminent example of a hardass biglaw partner I've ever encountered. I could not imagine actually working for him if you aren't the type of person who enjoys billing 2600+ a year.

For literally anyone out there thinking this article isn't a complete BS puff piece, realize that Andy Calder saying this is the biggest joke of them all. The only thing Andy or KE is going to collaborate on or help you out with is to have no life other than billing the most you physically can, and Andy would feel no hesitation in kicking you to the curb if you weren't billing high numbers.
Hi! I actually know Andy Calder and have known him well since I was a 2L in law school (now a fifth year here at K&E Houston). Andy is actually a hilarious and great leader, and he cares about his associates. Personally, he made sure I got a month off when my dad had a stroke when I was a first year. The whole firm rallied around me too at that time. I also have never billed 2600 -- the most I have ever billed was like 2450 or something in 2020.

I've never looked at this site before, and I think it's super reminiscent of College ACB circa 2011 (which was just as toxic and fake as this seems to be). I guess my point is -- I don't appreciate you anonymously talking about my firm via your little anon accounts. I mean -- who are all of you? My name is Michelle Williamson, and I think anon posting in your little lair hunched over your little laptop / cell is super weird. Do you feel better bad mouthing my law firm and the head of my office? Maybe you should try taking your aggression out via workout or cooking dinner or something. And if you have an issue with Andy, and you don't even work here, I'm not sure why your opinion even matters or why you feel the need to opine.

To any of the K&E incoming associates or summer associates -- feel free to reach out if you have any questions from a legitimate associate at Kirkland that isn't trying to hide behind an American Psycho profile pic or other fake account. And I am happy to put you in touch with folks in another office or practice group too (I do debt finance). I think something that will help you all as you launch your careers is finding people at K&E to mentor and just be your friend -- I have met some of the best friends and mentors here during the last 4 years.

Cheers,
Michelle
I know Michelle - she is incredibly nice. If this is a troll, they are doing an incredibly good job of imitating what I would expect her to sound like on a msg board full of jaded cynics.

With that said, I also know that Michelle's experience at K&E TX is not typical.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:36 pm

legalpotato wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:21 pm
keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 1:31 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 10:26 pm
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:15 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:01 pm
Pretty amazing Andy Calder of all people is quoted as saying that KE isn’t a sharp-elbowed place. See: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... all/?amp=1

There’s a whole different thread that devolved into debating that email, but of the hundreds of partners KE could have sent out to back up Ballis and say the firm doesn’t deserve its reputation, it’s just funny that it’s this guy who got blasted in ATL less than two years ago.
Guy who mass-threatened to fire everyone thinks the culture is super chill, lol.

Also don't forget he actually *tried to deny he sent the email*. The one everyone had a record of, with his name on it! If he wasn't a high-fiber turd, I would almost admire the fucking audacity.
Have to give it to him though, he is the first person in the history of biglaw who got laid more in biglaw than pre-biglaw.
Having personally met and interacted with Andy (not as a KE associate or working underneath him) it is blatantly obvious both the email and stories about him are true. He has been the most preeminent example of a hardass biglaw partner I've ever encountered. I could not imagine actually working for him if you aren't the type of person who enjoys billing 2600+ a year.

For literally anyone out there thinking this article isn't a complete BS puff piece, realize that Andy Calder saying this is the biggest joke of them all. The only thing Andy or KE is going to collaborate on or help you out with is to have no life other than billing the most you physically can, and Andy would feel no hesitation in kicking you to the curb if you weren't billing high numbers.
Hi! I actually know Andy Calder and have known him well since I was a 2L in law school (now a fifth year here at K&E Houston). Andy is actually a hilarious and great leader, and he cares about his associates. Personally, he made sure I got a month off when my dad had a stroke when I was a first year. The whole firm rallied around me too at that time. I also have never billed 2600 -- the most I have ever billed was like 2450 or something in 2020.

I've never looked at this site before, and I think it's super reminiscent of College ACB circa 2011 (which was just as toxic and fake as this seems to be). I guess my point is -- I don't appreciate you anonymously talking about my firm via your little anon accounts. I mean -- who are all of you? My name is Michelle Williamson, and I think anon posting in your little lair hunched over your little laptop / cell is super weird. Do you feel better bad mouthing my law firm and the head of my office? Maybe you should try taking your aggression out via workout or cooking dinner or something. And if you have an issue with Andy, and you don't even work here, I'm not sure why your opinion even matters or why you feel the need to opine.

To any of the K&E incoming associates or summer associates -- feel free to reach out if you have any questions from a legitimate associate at Kirkland that isn't trying to hide behind an American Psycho profile pic or other fake account. And I am happy to put you in touch with folks in another office or practice group too (I do debt finance). I think something that will help you all as you launch your careers is finding people at K&E to mentor and just be your friend -- I have met some of the best friends and mentors here during the last 4 years.

Cheers,
Michelle
I know Michelle - she is incredibly nice. If this is a troll, they are doing an incredibly good job of imitating what I would expect her to sound like on a msg board full of jaded cynics.

With that said, I also know that Michelle's experience at K&E TX is not typical.
Michelle's hours experience is not typical? Disagree. 2,600 in a normal year (quoted a few posts above) would be high (pushing very high) compared to average. You can/people do bill 2,000 and still get an above-average bonus, not significantly above average but still better than the associate at a peer firm billing the same. The global pandemmy sucked for everyone, but aren't you incredibly grateful for the job security? I know I am. Now, everyone get back to billing.

thisismytlsuername

Bronze
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:22 pm

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by thisismytlsuername » Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:20 pm
thisismytlsuername wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:51 pm
This can't be real, but if it is, it's all incredible. This is subtly my favorite part though:
keassociate2017 wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:55 pm
I've been at K&E since I was a first year (now a fifth year) and I have never worked over 2500, other than in 2020 (I do debt finance, so it was a tough year). I generally am in the 2000 - 2300 range, and very well compensated for it.
Aka, I have worked 4 full years here, one of them was over 2500, the rest were in a wide range (and the lowest one is likely from a year in which I took month of family leave). Not exactly helping with these numbers.
Michelle here. I honestly do not track my numbers and some years are busier than others, obviously. I could pull up my hours reports for each month and relay to you, but (i) I would rather finish working so I can go walk with my husband then make dinner (thinking sea bass tonight) and (ii) I don't think that's any of your business. To note, I thought I was 2500 in 2020, but it looks like I was 2450 -- either way, what a horrible year (plus, I had to do restructurings instead of new money financings -- yuck!). Here's what I can tell you -- if you come to Kirkland & Ellis, you are going to work a lot, just like you are going to do at any top tier law firm. That said, we let people take on responsibility and lead work streams early -- which is great because it makes you a great attorney that can close a deal in a pinch. That is one of my favorite things about this firm, along with the people and the *perks*.

I really do need to jump on a conference call now (and I am so annoyed my coworker / friend sent me this site -- what a time suck!), but very nice talking to y'all!

Cheers,
Michelle
Do you not get the same monthly hours report that everyone else gets? Or do you just ignore them and count on Andy to send you an email telling you it's not a gravy train if you're not working enough? You're the only person I've ever spoken to at KE who isn't very aware of what they're billing hours-wise.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Kirkland/Bloomberg Recruiting Article

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2022 5:14 pm

thisismytlsuername wrote:
Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:48 pm
Do you not get the same monthly hours report that everyone else gets? Or do you just ignore them and count on Andy to send you an email telling you it's not a gravy train if you're not working enough? You're the only person I've ever spoken to at KE who isn't very aware of what they're billing hours-wise.
I'm at KE and I rarely look at the monthly hours summary. The exception is in the late summer to do math and see if I should try to take on some more work so I can hit some hours threshold that I think will help my bonus.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”