Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2023 4:50 pm
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
So Law.com announced the U.S. News & World Reports top law school list will be released tomorrow, and it feels like I'm waiting for bar results all over again.
How soon should I start trying to lateral if my school goes down a spot?
On my way to meet my therapist but I'm honestly freaking out.
Only way I don't get shitcanned is if they withdraw the list again and my school stays in the same position or better.
Kinda think rising 2Ls are in the same position but with having their offers withdrawn if their school sinks so posting this here.
Everyone already knows that Dechert just laid off 5% of its workforce.
That's almost as bad as Kirkland's layoffs.
Help please. I'm honestly having a panic attack.
How soon should I start trying to lateral if my school goes down a spot?
On my way to meet my therapist but I'm honestly freaking out.
Only way I don't get shitcanned is if they withdraw the list again and my school stays in the same position or better.
Kinda think rising 2Ls are in the same position but with having their offers withdrawn if their school sinks so posting this here.
Everyone already knows that Dechert just laid off 5% of its workforce.
That's almost as bad as Kirkland's layoffs.
Help please. I'm honestly having a panic attack.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Touch grassPaperView wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 3:05 pmSo Law.com announced the U.S. News & World Reports top law school list will be released tomorrow, and it feels like I'm waiting for bar results all over again.
How soon should I start trying to lateral if my school goes down a spot?
On my way to meet my therapist but I'm honestly freaking out.
Only way I don't get shitcanned is if they withdraw the list again and my school stays in the same position or better.
Kinda think rising 2Ls are in the same position but with having their offers withdrawn if their school sinks so posting this here.
Everyone already knows that Dechert just laid off 5% of its workforce.
That's almost as bad as Kirkland's layoffs.
Help please. I'm honestly having a panic attack.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Does anybody know when McDermott's start date is for new associates?
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
If this post is real, chill. Employers don't care or pay attention to the rankings, rather the rankings reflect how well schools are doing at employing people. No one past people applying to law school and snobbish law students pay attention to rankings.PaperView wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 3:05 pmSo Law.com announced the U.S. News & World Reports top law school list will be released tomorrow, and it feels like I'm waiting for bar results all over again.
How soon should I start trying to lateral if my school goes down a spot?
On my way to meet my therapist but I'm honestly freaking out.
Only way I don't get shitcanned is if they withdraw the list again and my school stays in the same position or better.
Kinda think rising 2Ls are in the same position but with having their offers withdrawn if their school sinks so posting this here.
Everyone already knows that Dechert just laid off 5% of its workforce.
That's almost as bad as Kirkland's layoffs.
Help please. I'm honestly having a panic attack.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
I think that, in practice, it's hard to avoid these firms. For example if you want to do M&A in NY, nobody is choosing a sketchy shop like Dechert or Ropes or Goodwin if they have a DPW/STB/S&C offer.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
subtle STB pumpAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 12:50 pmI think that, in practice, it's hard to avoid these firms. For example if you want to do M&A in NY, nobody is choosing a sketchy shop like Dechert or Ropes or Goodwin if they have a DPW/STB/S&C offer.
- charles117
- Posts: 391
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:00 pm
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
definitely avoid bsf
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
For M&A I think they belong up thereAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 12:55 amsubtle STB pumpAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 12:50 pmI think that, in practice, it's hard to avoid these firms. For example if you want to do M&A in NY, nobody is choosing a sketchy shop like Dechert or Ropes or Goodwin if they have a DPW/STB/S&C offer.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
They are a top tier shop for PE M&A, but IME - people weren't really going to STB if they had Davis Polk or S&C offers in handAnonymous User wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:27 pmFor M&A I think they belong up thereAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 12:55 amsubtle STB pumpAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 12:50 pmI think that, in practice, it's hard to avoid these firms. For example if you want to do M&A in NY, nobody is choosing a sketchy shop like Dechert or Ropes or Goodwin if they have a DPW/STB/S&C offer.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
agree with this. The few I know who chose Simpson over the other two (and maybe Cravath too) really wanted funds work, real estate M&A, and/or PE M&A and were pretty informed about why they wanted those practice areas. But just going back to the topic of the thread, Simpson has really pleasant people among white shoe firms (or law firms in general) and it's doing very well financially, so not a firm for rising 2Ls to avoid.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 2:47 pmThey are a top tier shop for PE M&A, but IME - people weren't really going to STB if they had Davis Polk or S&C offers in handAnonymous User wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:27 pmFor M&A I think they belong up thereAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 12:55 amsubtle STB pumpAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 12:50 pmI think that, in practice, it's hard to avoid these firms. For example if you want to do M&A in NY, nobody is choosing a sketchy shop like Dechert or Ropes or Goodwin if they have a DPW/STB/S&C offer.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
damn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
No, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
White & Case / Shearman
Rationale: international law
Why it’s flame: layoffs
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Disagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
I can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
The only thing law students should be interested in is vault prestigeAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:59 pmDisagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Wait, what? How do you know layoffs are over? Once a partnership has done layoffs they’ve signaled their willingness to do them again. Case in point, Dechert.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:02 pmI can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Market’s improving, and while I could see more instability at Cooley/Gunderson/Goodwin (side note: did Fenwick or WSGR have the same reaction? I haven’t heard much but have been low-key assuming they also had layoffs) give their tech exposure I’m not sure the non-tech firms that did layoffs would do more.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:44 pmWait, what? How do you know layoffs are over? Once a partnership has done layoffs they’ve signaled their willingness to do them again. Case in point, Dechert.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:02 pmI can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
When you think about why non-tech firms did layoffs, it’s because they overhired subpar associates in the massive pandemic PE boom, usually in backwater offices (cough KE cough), which is the same category that took the brunt of the layoffs (I do think I saw someone talk about a few Chicago layoffs at KE though, so YMMV). At this point, a big chunk of that increase is gone and I don’t see why firms would make more cuts without another major shift.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
I think you may be correct that, for some of these firms, the brunt of the layoffs has already occurred. But I still think any firm that laid off juniors deserves to be on the “avoid” list, even if the possibility of further cuts is remote.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:52 pmMarket’s improving, and while I could see more instability at Cooley/Gunderson/Goodwin (side note: did Fenwick or WSGR have the same reaction? I haven’t heard much but have been low-key assuming they also had layoffs) give their tech exposure I’m not sure the non-tech firms that did layoffs would do more.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:44 pmWait, what? How do you know layoffs are over? Once a partnership has done layoffs they’ve signaled their willingness to do them again. Case in point, Dechert.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:02 pmI can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
When you think about why non-tech firms did layoffs, it’s because they overhired subpar associates in the massive pandemic PE boom, usually in backwater offices (cough KE cough), which is the same category that took the brunt of the layoffs (I do think I saw someone talk about a few Chicago layoffs at KE though, so YMMV). At this point, a big chunk of that increase is gone and I don’t see why firms would make more cuts without another major shift.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Unironically this tho. There is literally no individual more undecided and mercurial than a summer associate at a large law firm. If you're going to a firm because you're interested in a niche area, prepare to regret it in 2 years.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:26 pmThe only thing law students should be interested in is vault prestigeAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:59 pmDisagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Vault prestige would lead someone to Cooley, Goodwin, et al, when they could go have much stronger job security at a Willkie or a Fried Frank.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:54 pmUnironically this tho. There is literally no individual more undecided and mercurial than a summer associate at a large law firm. If you're going to a firm because you're interested in a niche area, prepare to regret it in 2 years.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:26 pmThe only thing law students should be interested in is vault prestigeAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:59 pmDisagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
Are we calling getting rid of people after 2 years at the firm (rising third years) “laying off juniors”? That’s the youngest I know of that got cut at K&E and to me having two full years before any performance (or “performance”) cuts is pretty good by BigLaw standards. Certainly a far cry from 2008-era Lathaming of first years and 3Ls.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:45 pmI think you may be correct that, for some of these firms, the brunt of the layoffs has already occurred. But I still think any firm that laid off juniors deserves to be on the “avoid” list, even if the possibility of further cuts is remote.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:52 pmMarket’s improving, and while I could see more instability at Cooley/Gunderson/Goodwin (side note: did Fenwick or WSGR have the same reaction? I haven’t heard much but have been low-key assuming they also had layoffs) give their tech exposure I’m not sure the non-tech firms that did layoffs would do more.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:44 pmWait, what? How do you know layoffs are over? Once a partnership has done layoffs they’ve signaled their willingness to do them again. Case in point, Dechert.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:02 pmI can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
When you think about why non-tech firms did layoffs, it’s because they overhired subpar associates in the massive pandemic PE boom, usually in backwater offices (cough KE cough), which is the same category that took the brunt of the layoffs (I do think I saw someone talk about a few Chicago layoffs at KE though, so YMMV). At this point, a big chunk of that increase is gone and I don’t see why firms would make more cuts without another major shift.
Not trying to celebrate it, just don’t think it deserves extra flame.
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!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
I have heard tales of 2021s being stealthedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 02, 2023 9:05 amAre we calling getting rid of people after 2 years at the firm (rising third years) “laying off juniors”? That’s the youngest I know of that got cut at K&E and to me having two full years before any performance (or “performance”) cuts is pretty good by BigLaw standards. Certainly a far cry from 2008-era Lathaming of first years and 3Ls.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:45 pmI think you may be correct that, for some of these firms, the brunt of the layoffs has already occurred. But I still think any firm that laid off juniors deserves to be on the “avoid” list, even if the possibility of further cuts is remote.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:52 pmMarket’s improving, and while I could see more instability at Cooley/Gunderson/Goodwin (side note: did Fenwick or WSGR have the same reaction? I haven’t heard much but have been low-key assuming they also had layoffs) give their tech exposure I’m not sure the non-tech firms that did layoffs would do more.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:44 pmWait, what? How do you know layoffs are over? Once a partnership has done layoffs they’ve signaled their willingness to do them again. Case in point, Dechert.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:02 pmI can buy the W&C/Shearman one, but these three don’t make as much sense to me—the layoffs are over, and unless you believe the market’s going to get worse a junior would probably have normal market job security, no? And that’s before we discount speciality group interests etc.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:18 amNo, peak law student would be taking any of the firms to avoid over either. I can lay this out for the young whippersnappers.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Cooley / Gunderson
Rationale: tech is cool
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
Kirkland & Ellis
Rationale: bonuses that shatter
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs / doesn’t shatter for most associates
Goodwin Proctor
Rationale: culture
Why it’s flame: junior layoffs
When you think about why non-tech firms did layoffs, it’s because they overhired subpar associates in the massive pandemic PE boom, usually in backwater offices (cough KE cough), which is the same category that took the brunt of the layoffs (I do think I saw someone talk about a few Chicago layoffs at KE though, so YMMV). At this point, a big chunk of that increase is gone and I don’t see why firms would make more cuts without another major shift.
Not trying to celebrate it, just don’t think it deserves extra flame.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
No one in the real world thinks those firms are materially different. Vault prestige kicks in around 10-20 (with some exceptions for boutiques).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 02, 2023 6:11 amVault prestige would lead someone to Cooley, Goodwin, et al, when they could go have much stronger job security at a Willkie or a Fried Frank.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:54 pmUnironically this tho. There is literally no individual more undecided and mercurial than a summer associate at a large law firm. If you're going to a firm because you're interested in a niche area, prepare to regret it in 2 years.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:26 pmThe only thing law students should be interested in is vault prestigeAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:59 pmDisagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid for rising 2Ls
My point here, though, is that once a firm signals a willingness to lay off juniors, that firm — regardless of prestige — should be avoided like the plague by rising 2Ls. Getting laid off as a junior from a V20 firm has a high risk of literally tanking your career, whereas someone who hangs around a V50 is very likely to end up totally fine.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:15 pmNo one in the real world thinks those firms are materially different. Vault prestige kicks in around 10-20 (with some exceptions for boutiques).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 02, 2023 6:11 amVault prestige would lead someone to Cooley, Goodwin, et al, when they could go have much stronger job security at a Willkie or a Fried Frank.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 9:54 pmUnironically this tho. There is literally no individual more undecided and mercurial than a summer associate at a large law firm. If you're going to a firm because you're interested in a niche area, prepare to regret it in 2 years.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:26 pmThe only thing law students should be interested in is vault prestigeAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:59 pmDisagree - if you are doing it because you are actually interested in doing REIT/PE M&A, it is perfectly justifiedAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:55 amdamn turning down cravath for stb is peak law student mentality
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login