Top Law Schools

Are biglaw firms reluctant to hire candidates who express interest in academia? I would think so because they would probably like to hire candidates who want to try to stay in their firm as long as possible.

How much does it hurt to mention, however briefly, your academia interests during biglaw interviews? Does anyone have relevant experience/anecdotes?

hychu3 wrote:Are biglaw firms reluctant to hire candidates who express interest in academia? I would think so because they would probably like to hire candidates who want to try to stay in their firm as long as possible.

How much does it hurt to mention, however briefly, your academia interests during biglaw interviews? Does anyone have relevant experience/anecdotes?

You realize that they don't conduct the interviews with a polygraph right? Why would volunteer that info in the first place?

m

The issue is more how you answer the question when it's asked, not whether to volunteer the information. I had a friend who was a JD/PhD who was obviously seeking to go into legal academia after a few years of law practice — one glance at his resume and transcript would make that obvious, even if he pushed the resume as far toward biglaw as he could. He did OCI and got an SA position, so somehow when they asked him the question, he had a decent answer, but I don't know what it was. If your materials scream "I AM TRYING TO BE A LAW PROFESSOR" — which some people's do — you have to have an answer to that question.

Frankly, I'm not sure how to answer the question. OCI employers took one look at my materials and asked me about going into public interest, because it was just staring them in the face. I acknowledged that it was an interest of mine but then tried to redirect back to biglaw and why it would make sense for me, and what I could bring to a firm that would be useful to them. It went okay, but I think I underperformed my grades/school at OCI (though I landed something I'm quite happy with).

The technique is called "block and bridge," and Google turns up a bajillion resources on it. But talk to OCS at your school to get more details on how to handle the question.

But for god's sake, don't volunteer the information if no one asks.

Don't volunteer that information.

But considering firms assume you are costing the firm money at least the first three years you are there I can't imagine they are thrilled with the idea of hiring someone who is planning to bail.

Yeah.

In an interview for a position at a company that is trying to make money, you should never be expressing interest in doing something that is not 1) the job you are interviewing for, or 2) a job that logically follows from the job you are interviewing for, assuming that job could be performed for that same company.

If you do express interests not in line with those conditions, it will seriously undermine your chances of being hired. It's really common sense -- don't do it.

Cellar-door wrote:Don't volunteer that information.

But considering firms assume you are costing the firm money at least the first three years you are there I can't imagine they are thrilled with the idea of hiring someone who is planning to bail.

I hear this all the time but don't really get it. How are you costing them money if your all-in pay is less than $200k + benefits and you're billing over $1 million? Collections flow up the food chain, not down.

kartelite wrote:

Cellar-door wrote:Don't volunteer that information.

But considering firms assume you are costing the firm money at least the first three years you are there I can't imagine they are thrilled with the idea of hiring someone who is planning to bail.

I hear this all the time but don't really get it. How are you costing them money if your all-in pay is less than $200k + benefits and you're billing over $1 million? Collections flow up the food chain, not down.

A lot of junior associate billables get written off. And even the ones that do count start around $300 an hour, so it's unlikely you'd get up to a million dollars worth early on even if they all counted.

Tiago Splitter wrote:

kartelite wrote:

Cellar-door wrote:Don't volunteer that information.

But considering firms assume you are costing the firm money at least the first three years you are there I can't imagine they are thrilled with the idea of hiring someone who is planning to bail.

I hear this all the time but don't really get it. How are you costing them money if your all-in pay is less than $200k + benefits and you're billing over $1 million? Collections flow up the food chain, not down.

A lot of junior associate billables get written off. And even the ones that do count start around $300 an hour, so it's unlikely you'd get up to a million dollars worth early on even if they all counted.

I can see the write-offs, but BigLaw fresh associates start at only $300 an hour? I assumed it would be higher, as more senior associates are often $600+. At a boutique consulting firm where I worked, associates (sometimes straight out of college) would routinely be billed at higher than that.

Even at a very conservative $300/hr, if you only collect on 1500 hours that's $450k. I know there's overhead and all, but still it seems like they would at least be pulling their own weight as long as there's decent work flow?

kartelite wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

kartelite wrote:

Cellar-door wrote:Don't volunteer that information.

But considering firms assume you are costing the firm money at least the first three years you are there I can't imagine they are thrilled with the idea of hiring someone who is planning to bail.

I hear this all the time but don't really get it. How are you costing them money if your all-in pay is less than $200k + benefits and you're billing over $1 million? Collections flow up the food chain, not down.

A lot of junior associate billables get written off. And even the ones that do count start around $300 an hour, so it's unlikely you'd get up to a million dollars worth early on even if they all counted.

I can see the write-offs, but BigLaw fresh associates start at only $300 an hour? I assumed it would be higher, as more senior associates are often $600+. At a boutique consulting firm where I worked, associates (sometimes straight out of college) would routinely be billed at higher than that.

Even at a very conservative $300/hr, if you only collect on 1500 hours that's $450k. I know there's overhead and all, but still it seems like they would at least be pulling their own weight as long as there's decent work flow?

one thing you have to consider is real estate. in a place like manhattan, the rent for a first-year associate's office (pro-rated) probably costs more than his or her salary. plus training, benefits, and bonus...it adds up.

eta: i'm a 0L, not a law student or grad. i do work in biglaw as a non-attorney, though.

first off, getting into academia is much harder than landing biglaw.

you need absolutely amazing grades + law review editorial board + clerking + getting published + some prestigious ivy background . assuming you have those requirements, firms will be knocking down your door trying to court the fuck out of you- and do not care that you are going to leave within 5 years.

but all this is preempted by DF's question, why the fuck would you volunteer this information?

I'd like to thank everyone who posted in this thread. Your strong language definitely makes it crystal clear that I should hide my academia thoughts.

Anyone who reads my resume, as it is, would probably think I want to be a professor, especially with all the papers I've written and the research assistant positions I've held during and after college. I guess I'll have to be brave and cut them out. I'll fare better looking like a lazy ass who's done little in free time than an academic wanna-be.

hychu3 wrote:I'd like to thank everyone who posted in this thread. Your strong language definitely makes it crystal clear that I should hide my academia thoughts.

Anyone who reads my resume, as it is, would probably think I want to be a professor, especially with all the papers I've written and the research assistant positions I've held during and after college. I guess I'll have to be brave and cut them out. I'll fare better looking like a lazy ass who's done little in free time than an academic wanna-be.

Leave the papers and the RA during law school. Nobody is going to assume you are gunning for academia. I'd cut out college RA gigs because nobody cares.

I think lots of people who aren't gunning for academia work as RAs and publish (a note, at least). And I don't think college papers signal that you're going to be an academic, or you'd have just gone on to a PhD program. If you have multiple publications in law reviews that aren't your school's law review, maybe edit those down.

Thanks for the prompt replies.