Biglaw firing tendencies Forum
-
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:02 am
Biglaw firing tendencies
There seems to be a lot of people who say that associates don't last long in large firms.
I guess I just want more elaboration on this topic. I understand there are long hours as well as large and sometimes boring workloads. So I'm not too curious about why people might leave of their own volition. What I'm more curious of is why do large firms tend to fire so many associates? Or is this exaggerated? I haven't seen statistics on this but it seems to be a real concern on this forum.
Disclaimer: 0L
I guess I just want more elaboration on this topic. I understand there are long hours as well as large and sometimes boring workloads. So I'm not too curious about why people might leave of their own volition. What I'm more curious of is why do large firms tend to fire so many associates? Or is this exaggerated? I haven't seen statistics on this but it seems to be a real concern on this forum.
Disclaimer: 0L
- transferror
- Posts: 816
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:42 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Biglawl associates have a short shelf life, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're all getting fired. Lots/most leave on their own
-
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:21 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
pretty sure you dont get fired. that requires paperwork they dont want. you either get phased out or you leave on your own. they dont need to fire you to get you out the door after 1-2 years
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
As a practical matter, firms need large numbers of junior associates to do drudge work, smaller number of midlevels to do substantive work, and smaller still numbers of senior associates to supervise. So they hire large entry-level classes, then depend on voluntary or sometimes involuntary attrition to "right size" each class year. Firms don't generally fire people. Instead, they encourage people to leave gradually through negative performance reviews, and talks about how they don't have a future at the firm.SemiReverseSplinter wrote:There seems to be a lot of people who say that associates don't last long in large firms.
I guess I just want more elaboration on this topic. I understand there are long hours as well as large and sometimes boring workloads. So I'm not too curious about why people might leave of their own volition. What I'm more curious of is why do large firms tend to fire so many associates? Or is this exaggerated? I haven't seen statistics on this but it seems to be a real concern on this forum.
Disclaimer: 0L
You might ask: why don't they just keep people around doing the same work? The danger of that is that without a chance of advancement, your good people will leave, while those who can't find anything better will stick around.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Firms will fire people. Not on the spot, but they'll give you 3-6 months to find something else or you get fired.rayiner wrote:As a practical matter, firms need large numbers of junior associates to do drudge work, smaller number of midlevels to do substantive work, and smaller still numbers of senior associates to supervise. So they hire large entry-level classes, then depend on voluntary or sometimes involuntary attrition to "right size" each class year. Firms don't generally fire people. Instead, they encourage people to leave gradually through negative performance reviews, and talks about how they don't have a future at the firm.SemiReverseSplinter wrote:There seems to be a lot of people who say that associates don't last long in large firms.
I guess I just want more elaboration on this topic. I understand there are long hours as well as large and sometimes boring workloads. So I'm not too curious about why people might leave of their own volition. What I'm more curious of is why do large firms tend to fire so many associates? Or is this exaggerated? I haven't seen statistics on this but it seems to be a real concern on this forum.
Disclaimer: 0L
You might ask: why don't they just keep people around doing the same work? The danger of that is that without a chance of advancement, your good people will leave, while those who can't find anything better will stick around.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 8058
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:47 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Can anyone speak to going into BigLaw with the intention to leave as quickly as possible for In-house jobs? This is my current game plan if its feasible.
Last edited by FSK on Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 6:49 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
You need to put in time to get a good in-house gig but if you're not concerned about career advancement after BigLaw, then it doesn't really matter and you can take the first thing that comes at you.flawschoolkid wrote:Can anyone speak to going into BigLaw with the intention to leave as quickly as possible for In-house jobs? This is my current game plan if its feasible.
"Phased out" means getting fired. They don't give you work and your hours tank. Or they load you with hours because they know you're leaving and want to get the most billables they can out of you. They tell you at your review that you should consider your professional and career growth. You get three months severance and your profile on the website.toothbrush wrote:pretty sure you dont get fired. that requires paperwork they dont want. you either get phased out or you leave on your own. they dont need to fire you to get you out the door after 1-2 years
From people I've talked to, it really depends on the firm. Some are more willing to get rid of juniors en masse and some will rarely get rid of juniors so long as they make a good go at it. Some offer more flexibility as a midlevel with either changing groups and taking a cut in your year and some don't bend at all.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
I'm not sure any firm ITE is getting rid of juniors in masse.
-
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 6:49 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
En masse is absolutely the wrong word. But I've spoken with people where juniors are definitely on the chopping block after reviews and people where juniors are, for the most part, off the table, at least for the first year or two. They could have also been feeding me bullshit or talking to me about very narrow slivers that they see or hear about. The biggest surprise to me was the latter where if you're passable and put forth an effort to succeed to a minimal extent, it seems like most places will keep you on for a couple years which goes against the sort of image you otherwise receive about firms.Desert Fox wrote:I'm not sure any firm ITE is getting rid of juniors in masse.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
I think you are pretty safe for two years.
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Yep, the first big purge occurs at the end of an associate class's third year from what I've seen/heard.Desert Fox wrote:I think you are pretty safe for two years.
-
- Posts: 1016
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
....
Last edited by Learn_Live_Hope on Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Are you lit or corporate?flawschoolkid wrote:Can anyone speak to going into BigLaw with the intention to leave as quickly as possible for In-house jobs? This is my current game plan if its feasible.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:44 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
-
- Posts: 12612
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Thanks for posting.wreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
-
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:02 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Please describe your relation to your bootstraps.wreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
- TheSpanishMain
- Posts: 4744
- Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:26 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
X-TREMEwreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:44 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
I don't know about bootstraps but boots are good for shoving up people's asses. Ha!Julius wrote:Please describe your relation to your bootstraps.wreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
Since you were asking about my job, I was a prosecutor for nearly 25 years.
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:44 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Nah. I was being told something I'd already known when I was a kid...TheSpanishMain wrote:X-TREMEwreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Ah, well the rest of your posting makes a lot more sense now.wreek wrote:I don't know about bootstraps but boots are good for shoving up people's asses. Ha!Julius wrote:Please describe your relation to your bootstraps.wreek wrote:I was told very early in law school don't even attempt BigLaw because 1) I have a major attitude problem 2) I don't play well with others. This highly amused because I never wanted BigLaw in the first place.
Since you were asking about my job, I was a prosecutor for nearly 25 years.
-
- Posts: 12612
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
I thought I smelled boomer.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:44 pm
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Not a boomer. Feels like it though!Mal Reynolds wrote:I thought I smelled boomer.
- anyriotgirl
- Posts: 8349
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:54 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
at the very youngest you're 50 and at the oldest, you're idk let's say 70wreek wrote:Not a boomer. Feels like it though!Mal Reynolds wrote:I thought I smelled boomer.
that's close enough to boomer for me
- seespotrun
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
Just a child prodigy. Nothing to see here, folks. A 35 y.o. with 30 years of prosecutorial experience.wreek wrote:Not a boomer. Feels like it though!Mal Reynolds wrote:I thought I smelled boomer.
-
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:53 am
Re: Biglaw firing tendencies
All so the firm doesn't make headlines for mass firings and we don't have to list being fired on our resumes. What a swell deal.Desert Fox wrote:Firms will fire people. Not on the spot, but they'll give you 3-6 months to find something else or you get fired.rayiner wrote:As a practical matter, firms need large numbers of junior associates to do drudge work, smaller number of midlevels to do substantive work, and smaller still numbers of senior associates to supervise. So they hire large entry-level classes, then depend on voluntary or sometimes involuntary attrition to "right size" each class year. Firms don't generally fire people. Instead, they encourage people to leave gradually through negative performance reviews, and talks about how they don't have a future at the firm.SemiReverseSplinter wrote:There seems to be a lot of people who say that associates don't last long in large firms.
I guess I just want more elaboration on this topic. I understand there are long hours as well as large and sometimes boring workloads. So I'm not too curious about why people might leave of their own volition. What I'm more curious of is why do large firms tend to fire so many associates? Or is this exaggerated? I haven't seen statistics on this but it seems to be a real concern on this forum.
Disclaimer: 0L
You might ask: why don't they just keep people around doing the same work? The danger of that is that without a chance of advancement, your good people will leave, while those who can't find anything better will stick around.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login