Biglaw: transferring to a different city? Forum

[Glasseyes]

I realize this would probably make more sense in the employment forum, but I don't think I can post there as a 0L. How difficult it is to transfer from city to city once you're working in Biglaw? I'm sure a lot of factors come into play, but is this even on the table?

[TheSpanishMain]

Also interested in this. Hypothetically, say you're working for a firm with offices in multiple cities. Is it relatively accepted for someone to try to transfer to a different city's office, say because of a spouse's career or something?

[TooOld4This]

As with most things, it depends.

Intra-firm transfers depends on what practice group you are in and staffing needs. If you do X and want to transfer to city A, if that office doesn't have an X group there, your chances are very low. Even if they do let you, you are at a pretty big disadvantage in your career. Out of sight, out of mind very much comes into play. Switching practice groups doesn't always fix the problem, since you may be too senior or there may not be a need (and if there is, you should investigate whether or not it is a stroke of luck, or there is a reason that group is understaffed).

Lateraling is lateraling. Your good reason should be front and center in your cover letter, but it is always need-driven. If the economy ever takes off again, things will likely get much, much easier, but in the meantime, it will be a grind to find places with slots. Tap into your alumni network/classmates to find out who might be hiring for what. Targeted letters tend to work best, but you don't want to express interest/tailor your resume for the wrong group.

[Glasseyes]

The reason I asked the original question is because of a recent conversation I had with two practicing lawyers the other day: both told me this is totally doable. While they were well-intentioned, I found it hard to believe. One graduated from Stanford and left biglaw for in-house entertainment work years ago; the other is a biglaw recruiter who came out of Columbia. I suspect the ease with which these two navigate their careers might not apply to my future, as I contemplate spending a fortune for some lower T14 action, or being "responsible" and choosing a solid T20 and consigning myself to cities I don't want to live in. But if moving around once the job is secure is a viable option, at least there's a dim light at the end of a dark tunnel.

[philosoraptor]

I know this happens occasionally at my firm, but I think you have to have a pretty good reason (e.g., spouse's career). I would never join a big firm with the expectation of transferring offices. Partners can be pretty territorial about their associates, especially in secondary-market offices/cities that have strong cultures.

[Otunga]

I know this happens occasionally at my firm, but I think you have to have a pretty good reason (e.g., spouse's career). I would never join a big firm with the expectation of transferring offices. Partners can be pretty territorial about their associates, especially in secondary-market offices/cities that have strong cultures.

Hm. What do you think of a lateral from NYC to Boston, or another secondary Northeastern market?

[philosoraptor]

I know this happens occasionally at my firm, but I think you have to have a pretty good reason (e.g., spouse's career). I would never join a big firm with the expectation of transferring offices. Partners can be pretty territorial about their associates, especially in secondary-market offices/cities that have strong cultures.

Hm. What do you think of a lateral from NYC to Boston, or another secondary Northeastern market?

I don't know any associates in my group and office who have lateraled in, but from what I gather from associates I know in other offices, local ties (e.g., spouse) and transferable expertise are important.

[twenty 8]

Partners can be pretty territorial about their associates, especially in secondary-market offices/cities that have strong cultures.

You might be right about that. Never quite looked at it that way, I thought we just clicked. I was given the opportunity to transfer to a new location by the partner heading up the new office in the state's largest metro (five hours from the home office).

Not sure if it would have a made a difference in terms of relocation amenities (and modest bump in pay) if I would have asked to move versus being asked to accept this relocation. Still in the moving phase, hopeful it plays out ideally.

[philosoraptor]

Partners can be pretty territorial about their associates, especially in secondary-market offices/cities that have strong cultures.

You might be right about that. Never quite looked at it that way, I thought we just clicked. I was given the opportunity to transfer to a new location by the partner heading up the new office in the state's largest metro (five hours from the home office).

Not sure if it would have a made a difference in terms of relocation amenities (and modest bump in pay) if I would have asked to move versus being asked to accept this relocation. Still in the moving phase, hopeful it plays out ideally.

I'm sure it goes both ways, but it's not like associates can have turf wars over who gets to work for a certain partner the way partners can do with an associate. I'm only a first-year, but I can already tell certain partners dislike it when I do significant work for partners in different offices. They probably figure that they're the ones who hired me, so I should be working for them.

The transfer you describe sounds like an awesome opportunity, but I'd imagine the politics are different if you follow a big-shot partner to a new office than if you move offices by yourself.

[Glasseyes]

I'm sure this is a dumb question, but this seems like the place for it: when you guys talk about lateral hiring, that typically means leaving your firm to go to another firm, right? Or is it still considered a lateral move if you transfer to another office of your existing firm? I understand what the term lateral means on its own, I just wanna get my lingo straight.

[philosoraptor]

I'm sure this is a dumb question, but this seems like the place for it: when you guys talk about lateral hiring, that typically means leaving your firm to go to another firm, right? Or is it still considered a lateral move if you transfer to another office of your existing firm? I understand what the term lateral means on its own, I just wanna get my lingo straight.

Not a dumb question, and this is the right place. "Lateral" typically means leaving your firm and going to a different one. If you're switching offices within a firm or going in-house, you wouldn't usually say you lateraled.

[Glasseyes]

I'm sure this is a dumb question, but this seems like the place for it: when you guys talk about lateral hiring, that typically means leaving your firm to go to another firm, right? Or is it still considered a lateral move if you transfer to another office of your existing firm? I understand what the term lateral means on its own, I just wanna get my lingo straight.

Not a dumb question, and this is the right place. "Lateral" typically means leaving your firm and going to a different one. If you're switching offices within a firm or going in-house, you wouldn't usually say you lateraled.

Gracias, sir.

[helmsleyB]

Summered in a smaller, recently established office of a biglaw firm and ~10% of the young associates I met there had moved from larger offices w/in the firm. From what they said, requests to move within the firm are more well-received when they happen early (1st or 2nd yr assoc.), when there is a compelling reason (spouse's job, etc.), and especially if the associate wants to move from a well-staffed office to a smaller, growing office.

Apart from that, I agree with most of what's been said. Openness to these moves will still differ firm-to-firm, office-to-office, group-to-group.