Start at smaller firm in primary market? Or start high? Forum

[DoveBodyWash]

OCI is approaching for the rising 2Ls and i was wondering if there's any wisdom in starting at a smaller/middle sized firm in a primary market as opposed to a true BigLaw firm.

If the firm charges lower rates and pays a lower salary and works with smaller clients, is the workload more sustainable? I understand that there will be periods where it's a grind, but on the average will it be more tolerable?

Or do smaller firms just work you as hard for less money/exit options? If that's the case, then I'm assuming the better choice is to just start as high up the food chain as you can so that you can maximize exit options right?

I'll have around 80k-90k in debt (COL debt plus residual UG debt), which isn't a small sum but i don't think it's high enough to force me to chase the highest salary. It's not that i'm trying to avoid working hard, but I do want to have some kind of family life (get married/have kids) and I'd prefer to last longer at a firm, even if it's smaller/less prestigious.

TYIA

ETA: This is assuming that a smaller firm is even an option. And I realize that i should adjust for practice groups and "fit" as well.

[FSK]

.

[LegalReality]

It's really simple, the smaller firms from my top school were only filled with oci strikeouts. The smaller firms just do the same exact thing for clients willing to pay less. I know a ton of people at small firms and most work just as much as I do in biglaw, except they may 60-100k less. Also, you will never have the chance of biglaw from a small firm, whereas going to a small firm is easy from biglaw.

Law is a prestige oriented field not experience oriented, you always want to start at the top of the ladder. Options to climb down are ample, climb up are impossible.

Not trying to be a snob but most of my friends would kill to get biglaw and work the same hours for twice the money. Don't buy the lifestyle myth, you can always go down if it doesn't work out in biglaw.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I think it's just really hard to generalize. I went to law school in a secondary legal market, so most of my classmates aren't in biglaw. (There's very little biglaw in the market.) At least some of the biglaw firms pay market, other firms pay local market ($100-120k), but it's also entirely possible to end up working 50-60 hour weeks for $50k-ish. I'm not sure that smaller clients/lower salary necessarily makes a huge difference, because at heart, law is a service industry and you're subject to what your clients want. I think it's really more about individual firm culture (and practice areas/models) than any direct correlation with size.

When I say practice areas: I don't think many people in my law school market or my current secondary [tertiary?] market are engaged in the kinds of corporate deals that dominate NYC biglaw and seem to result in a lot of firedrills and "get this done by tomorrow" and all-nighters. So to the extent the workload/culture derives from that particular practice area's needs, it doesn't seem to be like that here. But it's still easy to work pretty close to as hard, for less pay.

Caveat: this is based on what I've been able to glean from my classmates' experiences, it's not first-hand.

[DELG]

It is hard to generalize, as anony said.

I think people who go to smaller firms paying just behind market hoping to have better work/life balance are playing a dangerous game. And the odds probably are not in their favor.

[twenty 8]

I work in a large secondary market (top 20) at what might be described at a mid-size firm with around 80 attorneys (including our two in-state satellite markets). I started in Sept. The work is never-ending but there is time for a personal life. We work with Fortune companies but not on cases calling for dozens of lawyers. Staffing 5 attorneys on a case is generally our max.

Associates start at 120 and a handful of associates have made partner inside 5 years, then there are associates who have been here over seven years. That’s probably better than BL odds (although I do not know that for certain). On the other hand I doubt if I’ll ever be contacted by a headhunter.

If you end up at a mid-sized firm that pays well and treats you well, consider yourself in great shape, especially if you’re situated in a city you like.

[DELG]

I work in a large secondary market (top 20) at what might be described at a mid-size firm with around 80 attorneys (including our two in-state satellite markets). I started in Sept. The work is never-ending but there is time for a personal life. We work with Fortune companies but not on cases calling for dozens of lawyers. Staffing 5 attorneys on a case is generally our max.

Associates start at 120 and a handful of associates have made partner inside 5 years, then there are associates who have been here over seven years. That’s probably better than BL odds (although I do not know that for certain). On the other hand I doubt if I’ll ever be contacted by a headhunter.

If you end up at a mid-sized firm that pays well and treats you well, consider yourself in great shape, especially if you’re situated in a city you like.

I'm in a not-dramatically different situation but then I know of a firm just like mine by all appearances to an outsider that has all the shittiness of the most sweatshoppy NYC firm. So. A gamble.

[DoveBodyWash]

fuckkkkkkkkkkkk

[Jchance]

If you end up at a mid-sized firm that pays well and treats you well, consider yourself in great shape, especially if you’re situated in a city you like.

Isn't this the so-called 'unicorn midlaw' gig that doesn't exist for entry-level attorneys?

[DoveBodyWash]

If you end up at a mid-sized firm that pays well and treats you well, consider yourself in great shape, especially if you’re situated in a city you like.

Isn't this the so-called 'unicorn midlaw' gig that doesn't exist for entry-level attorneys?

Eh they exist but they hire less than 10 SAs usually and don't really do OCI beyond a handful of schools, so it's not a plausible option for most students. The midlaw option I have only took 5 SAs last year

[rayiner]

I think it really matters whether you want to do lit or crop. The comment above about law not being experience based but prestige based is flat wrong for lit. Your exit for lit will be government work or a small firm, and those places have little use for a mid level who has spent most of his entire career doing prestigious doc review/managing doc review. This won't necessarily be your fate at a top-ranked firm, but there is a high risk of it being so, especially in NYC in general commercial lit.

[twenty 8]

It wasn’t difficult to figure out what the firm was like during my SA. Associates occasionally worked late but not to the extent to call it a sweatshop. As an associate, I can verify that there are long hours but they come and go.

From the opinions I’ve read on tls, SAs do very little .... that wasn’t the case during the majority of our SA. The other disconnect is that we did not have many after work cocktail social events… only four come to mind. Do not know if that is a BL-MLaw divide or if it has more to do with not working in a NYC/DC type market. As an associate after work social functions come in spurts.

As far as SAs, my guess that we’ll (firm wide) likely bring on 10 SAs. If they’re good they’ll stay. If they’re not offered it won’t be because there is a lack of work.

[TooOld4This]

The difficulty is two-fold.

First, it is almost always easier to move "down" the ranks than up.
Second, as a rising 2L you still don't know anything about what you really want to do.

By skipping BigLaw you are most likely cutting off a wide array of opportunities. Permanently.

However, most of these opportunities are probably not things you are interested in anyway. (and BigLaw doesn't guarantee these opportunities) So, there is really no need to suffer several years of BigLaw to travel a path that you can get right out of law school.

Problem is, very few people know what they really want to do as rising 2L. Smaller firms in smaller markets give you much less room to maneuver. BigLaw firms have their own risks -- you may see what you want to do, but not get staffed on it, making it hard to jump into that field -- but you can usually figure out a way around this issue.

And, as others have stated, some work in smaller firms in smaller markets is just as time intensive for a lot less money.

So, if you can get a BigLaw job, it is usually pretty advisable to do so, unless you really know what you want to do and where you want to do it.

If you know you really want to be in Minneapolis, for example, then by all means start there and try to go to the best firm that does the type of law you think you are interested in. But, if you don't really know that market and you don't know/don't get offers from the top tier firms there, you are probably better off going with a known quantity in a major market and figure out what you like and don't like and then lateral.

[TheGreatFish]

The general rule at smaller firms is fewer hours for lower pay. Sometimes it can be drastically lower pay, but it can also be drastically fewer hours. I've worked for a small law firm where the typical week is 40 hours. It can climb higher when the firm is busy, but I wouldn't even say it climbs that much higher than 40 per week.

Exit options aren't that bad either. You tend to get better experience in small law than at big law which makes it easier to move to a new position. You'll definitely phase out big law, though. I would advise against the small law path if you have any interest in big law.