<p>i know they work about the same hours and make the same figures but which one has more benefits and better working conditions and stuff like that. I know i sound really picky but id like to hear some opinions anyway. I read Swinging Through the Wall street jungle and now im reading the Firm and i see alot of similarities between the two.</p>
<p>better yet, with a degree in biz law from Yale could i get into IB</p>
<p>I’ve always viewed corp law as better, more collegial working environment, slightly better hours, worse work content and after a few years, worse pay.</p>
<p>I think you certainly could, Law degrees are particularly helpful in M&A and Restructuring groups where knowledge of contracts and combinations, etc is important. Not to mention Yale has one of the best law schools in the country. I’m sure there are grads from there that go into IB, check out their class/career profile to investigate it further.</p>
<p>Between Corp Law and IB, I would definitely choose IB… but maybe that’s just me. I enjoy law, but thing IB is an excellent blend of different topics. It really can be interesting if you find the right group.</p>
<p>Wow, I’m shocked to see any former banker saying law might be better. Anyone who’s been on the hiring side in banking knows the corporate lawyers constantly seek to jump sides. The pay is way lower in law, bankers go home weekends leaving their attornies behind working and most smart people find the banker job far more interesting, diverse and fun. So many top lawyers I know are now bankers/HF managers, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know if that’s directed at me but if it is I’m not sure how you interpret that as me saying corp law is better. I do think the work environment is better and historically it’s been much more stable than IB but that’s where it ends to me except that as a junior banker at least, I think the hours in IB are a little worse or
is hardly something I experienced in three years. Switching from one side to the other can only go in one direction, so I think that’s an unfair comparison. Seeing how many out of law school are still at the their firm five years later vs how many out of B-school are still at their firm five years later (which I don’t know the answer to) would be a much more appropriate assessment.</p>
<p>from what i have read it takes much longer to become a partner in a big law firm than a managing director for an IB. Either way id like to be working in or near wall street. Im gonna be investing my money like a mad man anyway so job security and benefits are more important to me.</p>
<p>It traditionally used to take seven years to become a partner at a law firm, which was probably a couple years faster than it took to become an MD in IB. In the last decade or so, this has probably stretched to 8-9 years with a lower percentage of associates becoming partners than previously. If job security is really of primary importance to you, I would think corp law would be favorable to IB.</p>
<p>The whole corporate law world is in flux with many calling for an end to billing by the hour. Whole major law firms are going under. The security is no greater than in banking. While switching can only go one way, I’ve never heard a banker say they wish they could be an attorney. Yet I’ve heard many comment on how unfortunate it is the attorneys work equally hard on the same deals and get so much less when they close. And I’ve watched so many attorneys work deals to position themselves with future employment at the banks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bear Stearns, Lehman, Merrill? That’s certainly a much higher percentage than top law firms that have gone under. </p>
<p>Historically, you cannot refute that corporate law has been more stable. There has been no practice of fire the bottom 10% every year in law even in good years the way there was in IB. Where things go from here is still in flux but it is IB too. IB is moving towards law with regards to what % of total comp that base salary will represent. However, I don’t see the pay every third year associate in IB the same bonus any time soon like corp law does or at least had been doing.</p>
<p>How can you say that? The number making partner has been going down for decades which is tantamount to firing. And I don’t know the numbers but a lot of firms have folded and most have had major layoffs. It just doesn’t get the media attention.</p>
<p>Gellino, you don’t get it. Ibanking is the best thing in the world. Nothing compares to it. Absolutely nothing. How could you not understand this concept that hmom5 has been trying to convey?</p>
<p>Hmom5, everything you say is just incredibly biased and ignorant. Where are your facts? Show me which “top law firms” have gone under. Show me concrete data that says finance is more stable than law.</p>
<p>Back-off you " smart undergrads w/ limited knowledge". Your input is always welcome unless you’re trying to tell a 10-30 year experienced banker whats what, or calling them ignorant, biased or being condescending.</p>
<p>Let them discuss the topic intelligently and w/ experience and LEARN something!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why are you even in this thread? You offer very little value to it, or this banking forum in general. If that’s a personal jab at me - which I presume it is - I would appreciate it if you PM me next time so we can discuss and reach a conclusion in a non-public manner.</p>
<p>One of many articles follows. I live among these people, lawyers are much more afraid of the future than bankers in my circles.</p>
<p>[Recession</a> Batters Law Firms, Triggering Layoffs, Closings - WSJ.com](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123292954232713979.html]Recession”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123292954232713979.html)</p>
<p>Morrismm, for whatever reason, this board attracts nasty, arrogant, would be banker kids. As one wrote to me, many think this is how you’re supposed to act if you’re WS bound! I guess they’ll learn the hard way but meanwhile this board is not worth posting on. And the misogny on the other thread–who is raising these young men? You’d love to help kids but none worthy of the help seem to be here.</p>
<p>Misogyny is the hatred of women in general.</p>
<p>Where in that other thread does it qualify as misogyny? The only points I truly see are there aren’t many women ibankers at the higher portions of the ladder and some people don’t want to date/have a relationship with female ibankers.</p>
<p>The first point is a fact and the second point is no different than saying, “I don’t like women that smoke.”</p>
<p>Unless if you feel that ibanking is the best career for a woman and that it is superior to everything else. Any hint of discrimination against female ibankers is a snub at the ideal female and therefore all females.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How can you say that? Two years ago, law firms were not firing people in their first seven years on the job the way IBs were.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>None of the top 25 law firms have folded the way several of the top banks have. It’s not remotely the same comparison</p>