Why do people glorify biglaw? Forum

[JCougar]

What are you talking about? I have a PhD in engineering and made jackshit with a f'ing sword hanging over my head all day long. Law is the best decision I ever made. Bench work totally SUCKS!!! Half your effort will go in the trash. Law, by contrast, is solid money. Yummy good!

Really?

One of my best friends has a PhD in EE. Had his entire degree paid for, got a FedGov research job right away, starting at $98K/year...now making well into 6 figures. He gets into work at about 10:30 and works 40 hours per week. His wife has a PhD in Biomedical and also works for FedGov making about six figures as well.

Another of my best friends has a master's in engineering, works for a consulting firm, and makes about $120K after his bonus...but not including his stock options, which are a) about another $30K/year, and b) increasing in value at about 20% per year since started getting them 5 years ago. Dude owns both of his family cars outright (bought a brand new luxury minvan, leather interior, all the options, with cash last year with his bonus), already has college funds for all three kids, no school debt, on pace to pay off his big house ahead of schedule on his 15-year mortgage. He travels a lot, so he doesn't get to see his family half the time, but he's in fantastic shape financially.

[094320]

..

[Pokemon]

Most people who go to law school don't have the credentials, interest, or aptitude to get a job in finance, computer programming, any science-related job like medicine, etc. So law school was seen as the primary pathway to be able to get a higher-paying job. Then, once you're in law school, with a handful of rare exceptions, biglaw is going to be the fastest way to pay off that debt, and the interest rate is pretty terrible so ASAP is def. a warranted idea. And then, jobs that people do like in law, like govt. positions, in-house, etc. are often only accessible through biglaw as well.

And honestly, most high-paying jobs have horrible hours. I think bankers have it worse than most lawyers and medical residents have it worse than law firm associates. I've also met plenty of computer programmers in Silicon Valley who work 100 hour+ weeks.

Maybe it is different at NU cause of work experience, but plenty of people with background in those fields that go here. The idea that lawyers are idiots that could not do something else is over-stated on TLS. Though a great % of lawyers are naive people who choose the wrong field in college.

[JCougar]

Maybe it is different at NU cause of work experience, but plenty of people with background in those fields that go here. The idea that lawyers are idiots that could not do something else is over-stated on TLS. Though a great % of lawyers are naive people who choose the wrong field in college.

I basically got straight As in physics in undergrad. I could have totally gone the PhD route. My uncle is actually a physics professor and pretty well-known researcher in quantum physics.

Then I got this stupid notion that I wanted to pursue the path of social change.

[ilikebaseball]

Although I don't really care for the prestige of BL, the money would be kewl

[A. Nony Mouse]

Maybe it is different at NU cause of work experience, but plenty of people with background in those fields that go here. The idea that lawyers are idiots that could not do something else is over-stated on TLS. Though a great % of lawyers are naive people who choose the wrong field in college.

I basically got straight As in physics in undergrad. I could have totally gone the PhD route. My uncle is actually a physics professor and pretty well-known researcher in quantum physics.

Then I got this stupid notion that I wanted to pursue the path of social change.

Even physics PhDs have a horrible time getting jobs now. You're not missing anything.

[094320]

..

[speedtracer]

wait op ur the guy from that harvard vs uf thread
i don't get it

u want to practice in florida, don't want biglaw, and apparently love uf enough to turn down harvard even when uf wouldn't up your scholly
why are you relitigating the whole thing now that u got into stanford?
would your rationale for attending rly be that much different?
or r u just trying to tell everyone u got h/s?

Again, I'm not trying to start that debate here. Initially, I had thought that if I got into Stanford, the analysis would be the same. There's a slight difference in (a) the fact that I want to do IP, so Stanford is more attractive there, (b) the fact that I find out about financial aid before having to make the decision, and (c) have longer to think it through (Harvard was one week during an exam week). I don't really have any interest in bragging about getting both; I've just been thinking it through and noticed a trend around here of glorifying big law, which based on what I hear from TLS, sounds like something I want to avoid. I just wanted to see if I was missing something about it. Like I said, that's the sole purpose of asking here.

[speedtracer]

People do love biglaw. Because they want the status and the money.

I think this is what I'm getting to in my question. Are the only reasons they love it the status and the money? That overcomes the bad work environment and, more importantly, lack of free time?

What well paying job do you intend to get without the stress or long hours?

I know people with these kinds of jobs. They have advanced degrees in shit like science and engineering. Work 40-50 hours a week, make six figures by the time they were 30, little to no college debt, stay at home wife handles the kids, they come home to a fresh meal, etc.

I was really good at that shit too. Why the fuck did I ruin my life by choosing law?

I feel your pain. Ever since starting law school, I've deeply missed math. When I get bored in class, I do math problems or program stuff. Unfortunately, most of the math jobs I could find didn't pay well, or involved moving to areas of the country I didn't really want to live in (I got an offer from Allstate, located just outside Chicago [and having done my graduate work in Chicago, but being from Florida, I wanted to get my ass out of there ASAP] and another offer in DC)

[JCougar]

Even physics PhDs have a horrible time getting jobs now. You're not missing anything.

Pretty sure I could have gotten something with my family connections.

No one on either side of my family has ever done law...so I have no one to bail me out in this sphere.

[Mal Reynolds]

Even physics PhDs have a horrible time getting jobs now. You're not missing anything.

Pretty sure I could have gotten something with my family connections.

No one on either side of my family has ever done law...so I have no one to bail me out in this sphere.

This isn't your woe is me liveblog.

[WhiskeynCoke]

wait op ur the guy from that harvard vs uf thread
i don't get it

u want to practice in florida, don't want biglaw, and apparently love uf enough to turn down harvard even when uf wouldn't up your scholly
why are you relitigating the whole thing now that u got into stanford?
would your rationale for attending rly be that much different?
or r u just trying to tell everyone u got h/s?

Again, I'm not trying to start that debate here. Initially, I had thought that if I got into Stanford, the analysis would be the same. There's a slight difference in (a) the fact that I want to do IP, so Stanford is more attractive there, (b) the fact that I find out about financial aid before having to make the decision, and (c) have longer to think it through (Harvard was one week during an exam week). I don't really have any interest in bragging about getting both; I've just been thinking it through and noticed a trend around here of glorifying big law, which based on what I hear from TLS, sounds like something I want to avoid. I just wanted to see if I was missing something about it. Like I said, that's the sole purpose of asking here.

"In it for the prestige and money" is an absolutely idiotic oversimplification.

I like to think of biglaw as the legal profession's version of a medical residency. You suffer through crazy hours for a few years, try your best to hack it, then doors open. It's pretty much a pre-requisite if you want to go in-house or work at one of a number of different federal (and often state/city) agencies. It's also a great way to learn how to be a lawyer if you want to go solo. But, unlike a medical residency, biglaw starts at $160k/yr + bonus + yearly raises.

I don't understand what you're be missing. If you aren't shooting for criminal law, and want a successful and lucrative legal career, biglaw is the most realistic, direct, and sometimes only way to achieve that. What the fuck did you go to law school to do, exactly? You gonna go work at the Hague straight out of USF?

I'll be honest... If you want to be a lawyer, are interested in IP, and turn down Stanford to stay at USF, you are objectively retarded. The name of your law school will be plastered at the top of your resume for the rest of your career. Stanford will open doors for you. Alot of them. I haven't heard anything from you that comes anywhere close to justifying you shitting all over such an incredible opportunity, just to stay at some state school in Florida with no career direction.

For example, heres a decent reason: (1) you are getting a full ride; AND (2) want to practice criminal law in Florida.

[pancakes3]

This thread is just flat out passive aggressive douchebaggery and I'm calling bullshit. There's no way the OP did well enough in 1L to get into Harvard/Stanford and still make this topic in earnest. Even if big law is a career path you don't personally care for, it shouldn't be this hard for our GPA 1%'er to see the argument from the other side.

I'm honestly trying to understand why people enjoy it and what entices 0Ls about it, in order to see if my analysis is missing anything.

Your analysis? Missing? After 2 full hyper-successful semesters at law school, you need TLS to hold your hand in cracking this one?

[speedtracer]

wait op ur the guy from that harvard vs uf thread
i don't get it

u want to practice in florida, don't want biglaw, and apparently love uf enough to turn down harvard even when uf wouldn't up your scholly
why are you relitigating the whole thing now that u got into stanford?
would your rationale for attending rly be that much different?
or r u just trying to tell everyone u got h/s?

Again, I'm not trying to start that debate here. Initially, I had thought that if I got into Stanford, the analysis would be the same. There's a slight difference in (a) the fact that I want to do IP, so Stanford is more attractive there, (b) the fact that I find out about financial aid before having to make the decision, and (c) have longer to think it through (Harvard was one week during an exam week). I don't really have any interest in bragging about getting both; I've just been thinking it through and noticed a trend around here of glorifying big law, which based on what I hear from TLS, sounds like something I want to avoid. I just wanted to see if I was missing something about it. Like I said, that's the sole purpose of asking here.

"In it for the prestige and money" is an absolutely idiotic oversimplification.

I like to think of biglaw as the legal profession's version of a medical residency. You suffer through crazy hours for a few years, try your best to hack it, then doors open. It's pretty much a pre-requisite if you want to go in-house or work at one of a number of different federal (and often state/city) agencies. It's also a great way to learn how to be a lawyer if you want to go solo. But, unlike a medical residency, biglaw starts at $160k/yr + bonus + yearly raises.

I don't understand what you're be missing. If you aren't shooting for criminal law, and want a successful and lucrative legal career, biglaw is the most realistic, direct, and sometimes only way to achieve that. What the fuck did you go to law school to do, exactly? You gonna go work at the Hague straight out of USF?

I'll be honest... If you want to be a lawyer, are interested in IP, and turn down Stanford to stay at USF, you are objectively retarded. The name of your law school will be plastered at the top of your resume for the rest of your career. Stanford will open doors for you. Alot of them. I haven't heard anything from you that comes anywhere close to justifying you shitting all over such an incredible opportunity, just to stay at some state school in Florida with no career direction.

For example, heres a decent reason: (1) you are getting a full ride; AND (2) want to practice criminal law in Florida.

Please calm down. Again, I'm honestly asking why biglaw seems to be the end-all, be-all, everything will be magical and awesome objective of law school to many people I talk to (though the people actually there seem to have a different opinion, which is what confuses me). I'm trying to see if there's a silver lining beyond lots of money but no free time. I think that's a legitimate question.

This thread is just flat out passive aggressive douchebaggery and I'm calling bullshit. There's no way the OP did well enough in 1L to get into Harvard/Stanford and still make this topic in earnest. Even if big law is a career path you don't personally care for, it shouldn't be this hard for our GPA 1%'er to see the argument from the other side.

I'm honestly trying to understand why people enjoy it and what entices 0Ls about it, in order to see if my analysis is missing anything.

Your analysis? Missing? After 2 full hyper-successful semesters at law school, you need TLS to hold your hand in cracking this one?

If that were the point of this thread, I'd show you whatever proof you needed, but it's not. I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer out of law students, clerks, or biglaw associates (or even partners) that shows me that there's something about biglaw that makes you legitimately happier, which is why I'm asking. The med school residency comparison does make a lot of sense to me - but no med student really glorifies residency the way that many people glorify biglaw.

I should say as a background that when I was in grad school, I went through a traumatizing experience that redefined my life's purpose in a somewhat hedonistic way - I really just want to be happy. Given what I've seen, it doesn't seem like biglaw is, in the short-term, the way to get there (which seems to defeat the purpose of going to a school specifically to pursue biglaw, which was the goal that inspired my making this topic). I just wanted to see if I was missing something.

[A. Nony Mouse]

You're answering your own question here. No, biglaw generally doesn't make people happier in the short term (although some firms are better than others, some people genuinely enjoy it, and those who do probably prioritize free time differently than you do). But you're talking about the short term, and a number of people here have already talked about how they want a biglaw job for the advantages for the long term: primarily, paying off debt, and using the training and opportunities in big law to move into other, more congenial jobs in the long term. (I'd also suggest some people find sacrificing the time worth it for the a salary that allows them to provide really well for their family.) The analogy to a medical residency is pretty apt.

Now, maybe those reasons don't work for you, which is perfectly fine. But you need to recognize that a lot of people don't pick their jobs based on short-term happiness, but on long-term goals, which explains why a lot of people aim for biglaw and why it's a reasonable choice for them, even if it means short-term unhappiness. If short term happiness is your thing, biglaw is probably a bad idea for you - unless the kind of work that you do in biglaw makes you happy, of course.

I mean, there are also less rational reasons for the quest for biglaw, which are that most people who gun their way into the top schools - where biglaw is an extremely common outcome - have long been conditioned to gun for the best achievements they can, and biglaw is seen as one of the most prestigious outcomes for law students, so all righty, then, biglaw it is. Other people just see $160K and SA $ and bar stipends and can't imagine it can be that bad, especially compared to the options they believe they have with their BA alone. Then there's the security, where biglaw makes you a permanent job offer at the beginning of 3L rather than you having to wait for bar results and pound the pavement after graduation, as is the case for many people not in biglaw. Some of these groups of people may get to biglaw and love it, but lots probably don't.

So, I can totally get that you, personally, see nothing appealing about biglaw. But it seems a little weird that you can't see any reason why anyone else would find it worth aiming for.

[speedtracer]

You're answering your own question here. No, biglaw generally doesn't make people happier in the short term (although some firms are better than others, some people genuinely enjoy it, and those who do probably prioritize free time differently than you do). But you're talking about the short term, and a number of people here have already talked about how they want a biglaw job for the advantages for the long term: primarily, paying off debt, and using the training and opportunities in big law to move into other, more congenial jobs in the long term. (I'd also suggest some people find sacrificing the time worth it for the a salary that allows them to provide really well for their family.) The analogy to a medical residency is pretty apt.

Now, maybe those reasons don't work for you, which is perfectly fine. But you need to recognize that a lot of people don't pick their jobs based on short-term happiness, but on long-term goals, which explains why a lot of people aim for biglaw and why it's a reasonable choice for them, even if it means short-term unhappiness. If short term happiness is your thing, biglaw is probably a bad idea for you - unless the kind of work that you do in biglaw makes you happy, of course.

I mean, there are also less rational reasons for the quest for biglaw, which are that most people who gun their way into the top schools - where biglaw is an extremely common outcome - have long been conditioned to gun for the best achievements they can, and biglaw is seen as one of the most prestigious outcomes for law students, so all righty, then, biglaw it is. Other people just see $160K and SA $ and bar stipends and can't imagine it can be that bad, especially compared to the options they believe they have with their BA alone. Then there's the security, where biglaw makes you a permanent job offer at the beginning of 3L rather than you having to wait for bar results and pound the pavement after graduation, as is the case for many people not in biglaw. Some of these groups of people may get to biglaw and love it, but lots probably don't.

So, I can totally get that you, personally, see nothing appealing about biglaw. But it seems a little weird that you can't see any reason why anyone else would find it worth aiming for.

And this was exactly the post I was looking for. Thank you!

edit: For what it's worth, in terms of my not finding "any reason why anyone else would find it worth aiming for," I understood the reasons, but nearly all of them seemed like a stepping stone, in much the same way that residency is for med students. That, combined with the people posting about miserable biglaw experiences, made me wonder why people might aim for it as more than a stepping stone. The only justification I could really think of was that some people just really thrived in that sort of environment and didn't need/want free time beyond that. Your post did a good job of pointing out some other justifications.

[jbagelboy]

I feel like this is a veiled return to the transfer question, not a query about big law.

the analysis for stanford doesn't change from harvard unless you want to work at KVN, Susman, BSF, QE, ect. in the bay area. Then you'd need to go to a better school for an in.

You'll get big law from your current school if you want it; you'll get IP from your current school if you want it and have the background; what you get from transferring is basically what you would get from Harvard, although it's more CA centric than NY centric. Bigger OCI, more name brand firms, a nationwide, rather than statewide, network, and a lot more debt. Although I bet you could get DC patent lit as #1 at FSU or whatever as long as you have the credentials.

Your decision last time came down to 1) I want to work in Florida and 2) I love my school. Assuming those variables haven't changed, no reason to transfer. Whiskeyncoke is only right with regards to your future and transferring if you want to work outside Florida. "Doors opened" that are never entered might as well be doors closed or lost.

I was an applied math major in college too, and I sympathize with you 'missing' math and searching for some sort of union. I don't think it's out there. I've worked in IP at a large firm; I've worked in consulting; going to Stanford and getting an IP lit job isn't going to save you on that front. I also don't think the most instructive question is whether big law sucks or not or is worth it or not, since you'll have that option either way, and it really depends on what you're looking to get out of it. The firm trains you and pays your loans (this is why it's important to find a firm where you aren't just doing doc review as a first yr associate - find somewhere that will give you substantive exposure). You give it your life for a couple years. Then you can decide whether that's a bearable union worth pursuing to partnership or whether you want to take those skills elsewhere.

[TheSpanishMain]

I'm pretty ambivalent about BL myself, and am not taking on debt specifically so I can pass on it if I choose. I have to admit, though, that the idea of having a job guaranteed well in advance of graduating is very tempting. From what I understand, small firms aren't necessarily better. They vary pretty wildly; some pay well, some pay shit. Some do interesting work, some don't. Some offer livable hours, some work you to death. So you could end up at a small firm working BL hours for 1/3 of the BL pay. At least with BL you can depend on a decent paycheck.

[NYSprague]

0Ls only see dollar signs.

Big law is not like a medical residency: residents know their schedule, residents get direct training and job responsibility, residents have clear exit options, residents make more as time progresses.

[Cicero76]

Biglaw pays a ton of money, and it pays it while you're in your 20s, a time when you generally have few responsibilities and can afford to work that much. It sets you up well to get all kind of cool jobs after a few years. When you say we "glorify biglaw," I think you overstate it. It's the best thing you can do in the short term to have a solid long term: debt free, and a better (hopefully more fulfilling/less time commitment) job. If you start out in small law, your situation five years later is probably not going to be as good as the guy who endured biglaw for a few years.

[jbates14]

You're answering your own question here. No, biglaw generally doesn't make people happier in the short term (although some firms are better than others, some people genuinely enjoy it, and those who do probably prioritize free time differently than you do). But you're talking about the short term, and a number of people here have already talked about how they want a biglaw job for the advantages for the long term: primarily, paying off debt, and using the training and opportunities in big law to move into other, more congenial jobs in the long term. (I'd also suggest some people find sacrificing the time worth it for the a salary that allows them to provide really well for their family.) The analogy to a medical residency is pretty apt.

Now, maybe those reasons don't work for you, which is perfectly fine. But you need to recognize that a lot of people don't pick their jobs based on short-term happiness, but on long-term goals, which explains why a lot of people aim for biglaw and why it's a reasonable choice for them, even if it means short-term unhappiness. If short term happiness is your thing, biglaw is probably a bad idea for you - unless the kind of work that you do in biglaw makes you happy, of course.

I mean, there are also less rational reasons for the quest for biglaw, which are that most people who gun their way into the top schools - where biglaw is an extremely common outcome - have long been conditioned to gun for the best achievements they can, and biglaw is seen as one of the most prestigious outcomes for law students, so all righty, then, biglaw it is. Other people just see $160K and SA $ and bar stipends and can't imagine it can be that bad, especially compared to the options they believe they have with their BA alone. Then there's the security, where biglaw makes you a permanent job offer at the beginning of 3L rather than you having to wait for bar results and pound the pavement after graduation, as is the case for many people not in biglaw. Some of these groups of people may get to biglaw and love it, but lots probably don't.

So, I can totally get that you, personally, see nothing appealing about biglaw. But it seems a little weird that you can't see any reason why anyone else would find it worth aiming for.

In my opinion, I think the bolded is the reason most law students/0Ls want big law. Most of the people on this site, see law school as either you get BL or you failed. Another reason is basically the hiring needs of law firms. BL firms are always hiring because of the high turnover of associates. They pay well and the idea of paying off the mountain of debt is incredibly enticing. There are small/mid-sized firms that pay well, but they are not easy to find and they are not always hiring. A lot of those firms also want years of experience before hiring and law students aren't exactly the best options from a business perspective. Another sad truth is a lot of these firms are all about "who you know". At least with big law, students with good grades and good schools can blaze their own path.

[A. Nony Mouse]

0Ls only see dollar signs.

Big law is not like a medical residency: residents know their schedule, residents get direct training and job responsibility, residents have clear exit options, residents make more as time progresses.

But I do think many law students do see biglaw as similar, in that it's a stage you get through in order to do something else, which is physically and emotionally taxing.

[Mal Reynolds]

I mean, there are also less rational reasons for the quest for biglaw, which are that most people who gun their way into the top schools - where biglaw is an extremely common outcome - have long been conditioned to gun for the best achievements they can, and biglaw is seen as one of the most prestigious outcomes for law students, so all righty, then, biglaw it is.

In my opinion, I think the bolded is the reason most law students/0Ls want big law. Most of the people on this site, see law school as either you get BL or you failed.

In your first sentence you claim that most people chase biglaw because of the presitge or whatever.

Another reason is basically the hiring needs of law firms. BL firms are always hiring because of the high turnover of associates. They pay well and the idea of paying off the mountain of debt is incredibly enticing. There are small/mid-sized firms that pay well, but they are not easy to find and they are not always hiring. A lot of those firms also want years of experience before hiring and law students aren't exactly the best options from a business perspective. Another sad truth is a lot of these firms are all about "who you know". At least with big law, students with good grades and good schools can blaze their own path.

Then all of the reasons you cite are extremeley rational ones that have nothing to do with prestige.

[jbates14]

I mean, there are also less rational reasons for the quest for biglaw, which are that most people who gun their way into the top schools - where biglaw is an extremely common outcome - have long been conditioned to gun for the best achievements they can, and biglaw is seen as one of the most prestigious outcomes for law students, so all righty, then, biglaw it is.

In my opinion, I think the bolded is the reason most law students/0Ls want big law. Most of the people on this site, see law school as either you get BL or you failed.

In your first sentence you claim that most people chase biglaw because of the presitge or whatever.

Another reason is basically the hiring needs of law firms. BL firms are always hiring because of the high turnover of associates. They pay well and the idea of paying off the mountain of debt is incredibly enticing. There are small/mid-sized firms that pay well, but they are not easy to find and they are not always hiring. A lot of those firms also want years of experience before hiring and law students aren't exactly the best options from a business perspective. Another sad truth is a lot of these firms are all about "who you know". At least with big law, students with good grades and good schools can blaze their own path.

Then the rest of the reasons you cite are all extremeley rational ones that have nothing to do with prestige.

I think prestige is the basis for most people (basically 0Ls) "wanting" big law in the first place. For me, I had no idea what big law entailed and what the other options even were before starting law school. After a year, views completely change, and the more rational reasons kick in. But, for some people I know, they still have no idea why they want big law besides money and that's what everyone else is gunning for.

[Mal Reynolds]

Most people know what they are getting themselves in to. I would say the idiots who want to do only appellate lit at a DC boutique are FAR fewer than the people who see biglaw as a way to pay off debt and an entry into other desirable jobs and fields. You said yourself you learned about biglaw in law school. That doesn't sound atypical.