Post clerkship recruiting: Bad year, bad sample, or TLS myth Forum

[legalese_retard]

More stats showing why post-clerkship hiring will be tougher this year:

Litigation, which represents 32% the overall market, continues to disappoint, according to Peer Monitor. Demand for litigation dipped 1% compared to the same time last year, the seventh consecutive quarterly drop. And let’s not even talk about bankruptcy, where demand dropped by 5.9%.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/08/loo ... al-estate/

[bk1]

I'm graduating now and doing a 1-year clerkship next year. Say I want to go do a different firm than my SA firm.

When do I start applying? Is it like a 3L job search, where I network first but mail if all else fails? Do all firms wait on post-clerkship job offers until spring, or is it possible for me to take care of this before my clerkship even starts? Do I need to worry about the fact that I'm looking getting back to my SA firm?

Take a look at this thread: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 4&t=216841

It seems that the earliest firms start to look is January for people who will start that fall and that most start to look around the spring. I think if you can network and have someone pass your resume along that would be ideal but if you have to cold email then that's fine since can't always network your way into getting someone to pass your resume along.

[IAFG]

More stats showing why post-clerkship hiring will be tougher this year:

Litigation, which represents 32% the overall market, continues to disappoint, according to Peer Monitor. Demand for litigation dipped 1% compared to the same time last year, the seventh consecutive quarterly drop. And let’s not even talk about bankruptcy, where demand dropped by 5.9%.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/08/loo ... al-estate/

Pay wall pwnt can you post the full text?

[legalese_retard]

After years of relatively sluggish demand for legal services, there just might be a light at the end of the post-recession tunnel.

An analysis of 2014 law firm financials thus far shows—wait for it—growth in demand for transactional practices, many of which were hit hard during the financial downturn.

“Through the first quarter we’ve seen strength in M&A, corporate work, real estate, tax,” said Mark Medice, Senior Director and head of Peer Monitor, a division of Thomson Reuters that tracks performance among about 150 large law firms.

Seventy percent of those firms had transactional growth in Q1, he said, a boost that helped lift overall demand (defined as growth in billable hours).

For example, demand for corporate work was up 5% in Q1 compared to the same time in 2013, and has risen three of the past four quarters. Growth in demand for tax work rose by 6.7%, while real estate was up 3.7%–its fourth consecutive up quarter.

Now, Law Blog has heard this story before. Law firms get busy at the beginning of the year, giving rise to hopes that recovery is nigh and soon the good old days of abundant work will return. Then demand tanks later in the year, dragging down annual financial results.

“The big difference now is there seems to be more uniformity,” Mr. Medice said. “We want to cautious about overplaying it, but it is new.”

Just 32% of firms had transactional growth during the first quarter of 2013, whereas now the uplift seems to be more evenly spread across firms, he said.

But, of course, it’s not all good news out there.

Litigation, which represents 32% the overall market, continues to disappoint, according to Peer Monitor. Demand for litigation dipped 1% compared to the same time last year, the seventh consecutive quarterly drop. And let’s not even talk about bankruptcy, where demand dropped by 5.9%.

And a first-quarter analysis by Citi Private Bank based on 177 participating firms showed that demand growth—which it pegged at 1% overall—looks different depending on what type of firm you’re talking about.

According to Citi, global firms saw the biggest uptick—2.4% compared to Q1 last year—while national and regional firms charted just .5% growth in demand/billable hours.

And demand actually declined for all the 50 highest-grossing law firms, a trend that underscores the growing gulf between the richest law firms and everybody else.

[IAFG]

Very interesting, thank you.

[Anonymous User]

Litigation is rough. My firm had 40 SAs and only gave out 3 litigation offers. Stupidly, I told them I was only interested in litigation so I'll be looking for something after my clerkship. I'm not even holding out hope for biglaw anymore, I just want to be able to pay rent and afford drinks at the bar instead of pregaming a handle of Crystal Palace at my parents house.

[Anonymous User]

My co-clerk (who is approaching a 2 year mark) is having trouble finding things. She went to a top 10 school, worked at a big firm for 3 years, and now has 2 years of d. ct. clerking, yet she's barely getting interviews. However, she's only focusing on government (mainly federal) and is not barred in the jurisdiction she wants to stay in, so...

[JCougar]

jfc, reading this and similar threads makes me want to try for COA after my district court clerkship ends because I'm now convinced that I'll be jobless in a year. A lot of the problems in post-clerkship job searching seem to be specific to firms, though. Does anyone know if government hiring is any better lately? Even ignoring bigfed, how do DAs' offices generally look at federal clerks, for example?

I think bigfed is being overwhelmed at the moment in terms of hiring. Ever since the DOJ lifted its hiring freeze, there have been tons of job openings for AUSA gigs across the country. Problem is, you have several big law associates that have been put on hold for AUSA positions because of the freeze, and now they can start applying. Add to the fact that many AUSA offices had "Special AUSA Attorneys" (i.e. the attorneys that worked for free) and I am sure that they will be given special consideration for these openings.

As far as DA offices, I think that as long as you are open to any DA office in the country, you should be safe. Not all states/cities are in the same position when it comes to hiring DAs. Some have the funds to take on new attorneys, others are struggling and laying off attorneys. I think DAs really like hiring former law clerks, but if they don't have the money, they can't hire you even if you had the best credentials.

Yeah, I think just now people are starting to tap into the post-crash backlog (of about 5 years) of attorneys that would have gotten jobs but for budget issues, hiring freezes, etc. With BigFed, a lot of offices have someone from the last 3-4 years in the pipeline.

[84651846190]

My co-clerk (who is approaching a 2 year mark) is having trouble finding things. She went to a top 10 school, worked at a big firm for 3 years, and now has 2 years of d. ct. clerking, yet she's barely getting interviews. However, she's only focusing on government (mainly federal) and is not barred in the jurisdiction she wants to stay in, so...

It's not surprising at all that she's struggling if her search is that limited.

[Anonymous User]

My co-clerk (who is approaching a 2 year mark) is having trouble finding things. She went to a top 10 school, worked at a big firm for 3 years, and now has 2 years of d. ct. clerking, yet she's barely getting interviews. However, she's only focusing on government (mainly federal) and is not barred in the jurisdiction she wants to stay in, so...

It's not surprising at all that she's struggling if her search is that limited.

God I hope so. I have far less impressive credentials than she does.

[ResIpsa21]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

[09042014]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

Will your firm rehire you?

[ResIpsa21]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

Will your firm rehire you?

Unknown; my instinct is to say maybe, leaning towards no. I have mentioned the general concept of clerkships to several partners and the responses have not been positive. My impression is that they'd prefer me to keep working (a.k.a. making them more money) rather than get experience that will be valuable to me personally, but not to the practice here. This worries me enough that I am afraid to ask outright, lest I be perceived as uncommitted to my current work or having one foot out of the door.

[Arbiter213]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

Why not wait another year at the firm, build your network, and apply for a clerkship that would replace year 3. This would let you apply straight to AUSA offices/ DOJ.

[ResIpsa21]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

Why not wait another year at the firm, build your network, and apply for a clerkship that would replace year 3. This would let you apply straight to AUSA offices/ DOJ.

The plan would be to apply for the 2016-2017 term. That would give me 3 full years under my belt in biglaw before moving on. It would also mean leaving the firm right before my years of highest potential associate profitability. I am also concerned that I'd have to hide the clerkship from the firm in the interim. If I said "I'm leaving in exactly 2 years," I am truly not sure that I'd make it to the end of the month; this is biglaw, after all. I don't want to burn bridges here, but I think a clerkship might be just what I need to get to that next step (which is why I'm posting in the post-clerkship recruiting thread -- hope this isn't a hijack).

[Anonymous User]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

Why not wait another year at the firm, build your network, and apply for a clerkship that would replace year 3. This would let you apply straight to AUSA offices/ DOJ.

The plan would be to apply for the 2016-2017 term. That would give me 3 full years under my belt in biglaw before moving on. It would also mean leaving the firm right before my years of highest potential associate profitability. I am also concerned that I'd have to hide the clerkship from the firm in the interim. If I said "I'm leaving in exactly 2 years," I am truly not sure that I'd make it to the end of the month; this is biglaw, after all. I don't want to burn bridges here, but I think a clerkship might be just what I need to get to that next step (which is why I'm posting in the post-clerkship recruiting thread -- hope this isn't a hijack).

If you browse this thread and the general post-clerkship application thread for 2014, you'll see there's a lot of angst among current clerks (at least the ones who use this forum) about finding post-clerkship employment in biglaw. There also seems -- based on what people have said in these forums and my own job search -- to be a trend going on in which litigation jobs are more sparse than transactional jobs, unless you're looking at patent litigation. This is just to reiterate what's been said here -- a clerkship does not guarantee entry into biglaw these days, so the risk that you won't be able to get a biglaw job after your clerkship is not insignificant, particularly if going back to your previous firm is not an option. Of course, 2017 might be much different than 2014, who knows. But it's a gamble. At the same time, if what you really want is to go into government litigation (either at the DOJ or as an AUSA), my sense is that it would be easier (though not easy) to do so from a clerkship as opposed to a big firm (especially if you're not doing much litigation), and you can use the next couple of years at the firm to build relationships with folks at your firm who could recommend you even after you've left for a clerkship. Also, I think your instinct to keep under wraps that you're looking for clerkships is correct -- it sounds like you have little to gain and a lot to lose from disclosing it. The obvious downside to that is you wouldn't have a recommendation from one of the partners at the firm.

[legalese_retard]

a clerkship does not guarantee entry into biglaw these days, so the risk that you won't be able to get a biglaw job after your clerkship is not insignificant

I wouldn't limit it to just biglaw concerns. In my case, I can't even get a job at small insurance defense or personal injury firms.

[Anonymous User]

FWIW, I clerk on a district court that is not particularly "elite" and don't know a single clerk in my building (there are probably 15-20 of us) who had serious trouble getting a job post-clerkship (either biglaw in nearby markets, biglaw/midlaw offices in town, or another clerkship). Not doubting it's tough out there for some of y'all and don't mean to diminish your experiences, but it doesn't seem to be the norm where I am clerking.

[Lexaholik]

Having a clerkship on your resume is not a golden ticket. It only affects the qualifications aspect of your application. the other very important factors behind hiring (business needs, personality fit, etc) arguably matter more.

During my clerkship I knew a clerk who was well credentialed (magna at a local tier 1) but struck out nearly every place he interviewed due to some combination of lack of hiring by local firms (the market was terrible at the time) and poor interviewing skills. He thought finding a job would be relatively easy after getting the clerkship but ended up struggling with the job search. I was surprised, but not entirely-some years ago, a few of my law school (t14) friends with top grades received no offers after OCI. Oddly, it's often the ones who believe in "golden ticket credentials" who seem to fall short when searching for jobs.

[Anonymous User]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

I'm the anon above. I would wait it out for at least a few more years. My co-clerk has much better credentials than us both, and she hasn't gotten any AUSA/DOJ interviews in spite of about 50+ apps all over the country.

[legalese_retard]

Anyone with any updates (hopefully positive)? At this point I am going to have to live vicariously through other's successes.

I am beyond busy with the clerkship at the moment. I haven't had a weekend off since Easter and I have been going to work at 6am and getting off after 9pm most nights. I didn't mind working so much initially, as it kept my mind off the unemployment situation looming. But it is beyond frustrating that I am working these long hours, writing all these orders and opinions, and yet I can't even get a freaking interview at a firm in any of the 300+ places I have applied to since January. What's even more frustrating is looking at the associate profiles at the newest associates at the firms I am applying to and seeing that I have better credentials than them (at least on paper). Personally, I don't think paper credentials are really important in the actual practice of law, but I figured I should at least get some sort of interest from these firms.

Sorry for the rant....back to preparing for a Markman hearing, two criminal suppression hearings, a bench trial memorandum opinion, and three dispositive orders that need to be completed by next week...

[ResIpsa21]

I graduated in the top 33% from a T20 school in 2013, and I'm now coming up on the end of my first year at a V40 firm in DC. Am I crazy to think about leaving biglaw for a D. Ct. clerkship (assuming I could get one, which may be a longshot)? On the one hand, I feel like the clerkship would be a huge help for DOJ, USAO, or moving to a more litigation-focused firm (either biglaw or boutique). On the other hand, I would be walking away from my biglaw salary and the strong network that I'm building here, which includes many former federal prosecutors. Would it be smarter to ride it out here in the hopes of getting a partner to recommend me for USAO or DOJ some day down the road?

I'm the anon above. I would wait it out for at least a few more years. My co-clerk has much better credentials than us both, and she hasn't gotten any AUSA/DOJ interviews in spite of about 50+ apps all over the country.

Thanks to everyone for the advice on this so far. I definitely hear the cautionary tales and I am still waffling back and forth on this. I am curious, though, if you all would agree that outcomes are heavily dependent on (1) where the clerkship is and (2) whether the clerk was previously successful in landing a biglaw job. On the first topic, I see others on TLS and elsewhere arguing that clerks in the top district courts -- DDC, SDNY, EDVA, etc. -- will never have trouble getting a good job, and that there's a wide disparity in employment opportunities between these prestigious courts and a random flyover court. On the second topic, I also see arguments that the clerks who have trouble are the ones who couldn't get into biglaw in the first place (the "clerking is not a golden ticket to biglaw" warning), but that those who got offers out of OCI are usually able to find new firm gigs if they leave to clerk and then hit the market again.

Is anyone willing to share their experiences w/r/t clerking location and prior success in biglaw? My decision to leave the firm may turn on where I can get a clerkship and whether I sense that the market is more forgiving for those who already got into biglaw out of law school.

[arkhamhorror]

^^ I'd be interested in the above question too, from a slightly different perspective. I'm doing D.Ct. now and CoA after, then trying to jump to a different big law firm in the area of the country where the CoA clerkship is. I summered at/received an offer from my biglaw firm, but never worked a day there post-graduation. So would that qualify me as never having done biglaw, or is the offer enough to put prospective employers on notice that I'm not trying to backdoor my way in via a clerkship?

[Anonymous User]

FWIW, I am a clerk at a state supreme court and am not currently looking because I'm going on to a fed. circuit court clerkship, but most of my colleagues here have already lined up good jobs, including biglaw, government, and prestigious public interest orgs. And many are not staying in this state. From my vantage point, post-clerkship hiring doesn't look that bad. This is a particularly well regarded state court, but I can't imagine it is enough so that people here would be doing as well as they are if this were as bad a year as some of the TLS threads suggest. For whatever reason, I think the TLS sample may not be very representative. Maybe people who are doing well in their job search just aren't posting?

[Person1111]

^^ I'd be interested in the above question too, from a slightly different perspective. I'm doing D.Ct. now and CoA after, then trying to jump to a different big law firm in the area of the country where the CoA clerkship is. I summered at/received an offer from my biglaw firm, but never worked a day there post-graduation. So would that qualify me as never having done biglaw, or is the offer enough to put prospective employers on notice that I'm not trying to backdoor my way in via a clerkship?

If you had a biglaw SA, got an offer, and did two clerkships immediately after law school in lieu of going to your SA firm, I don't think firms will say "you're not biglaw material." The exception is if you did something else unusual after law school (e.g. extensive travel, a fellowship or other public interest work, etc.).