<p>I’ll answer brownug’s question about the positive side of the Big Law environment. It can be an incredibly exciting experience to work on a high profile case alongside a smart, talented team. There are some unreasonable people in any office, but a junior associate can try to get staffed on better teams over time and learn who to avoid when possible.
UnbelievableM is exactly right…law is a service industry. I worked every major holiday for my first few years…Christmas, Easter, Mother’s Day. Both associates and partners get more control over the years, but clients and deal realities come first, and that is often not conveniently scheduled.</p>
<p>It’s important to keep in mind that these “BigLaw” jobs are only available to the very top students at the very best schools(top 10% of class at a top 10-or better). And the Federal judicial clerkships?-even harder to get, usually only the creme de creme of law graduates from top schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the true numbers are much, much higher at the top 6 schools, cranky, but it drops quickly. More like 80% at HYS earn Big Law or a federal clerkship. Down to ~50% at Georgetown (#~14), and 40% for UCLA (~#16).</p>
<p>UChicago has a table on its '11 graduates, with near 100% grads reporting. ~50% are working at large firms (100+ attorneys), and 10% got a clerkship.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective/employmentdata[/url]”>http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective/employmentdata</a></p>
<p>No question. For better or worse, in order to get one of these jobs(free showers and an open office cafeteria at 3am) you’ve got to do incredibly well at the very top schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oy!! Sounds scary. 8-(</p>
<p>I think we should still look after our health in the pursuit of dreams. What makes a driven person work so hard? I think part of it is desiring a sense of accomplishment for sure and a host of other reasons. But, I think for many it is largely wanting to secure their financial futures and to ultimately (one day) have time to do things they enjoy and have free time w/o worrying about money. </p>
<p>Everyone probably wants to have that type of freedom. But if you ruin your health along the way, then your hard work would seem counter-productive towards your long-term goals. You may never make it! Or maybe make it in bad shape. 
As hard as people work in their careers, I think it’s odd that they wouldn’t work just as hard on their health (one of the most priceless things we have in life).</p>
<p>Biglaw after reading so much here seems just brutal and a <strong>notch above</strong> the other demanding professions I’ve heard about for some reason. </p>
<p>re: driven people - I do think that driven people would work very hard as well in another profession or in some other context. It’s just that biglaw billable hours combined with real deadlines I’ve heard about make it seem more intense on a regular, consistent basis.</p>
<p>I also think it’s important to work smart and not just hard. I remember asking Zoosermom and others this in another thread here last year about why not just hire more attorneys in biglaw to ensure the work gets done faster? You could argue that having more attorneys around with a few less hours per week for everyone else would keep people more productive and less exhausted. Being well-rested gives you greater speed, accuracy, etc. in completing tasks. </p>
<p>It just almost feels like the very structure of biglaw is inefficient or at the very least sub-optimal in the long run for employee health and happiness. </p>
<p>Here’s just an observation that’s not a secret. There are a lot of studies that show there is a link between mental well-being, happiness, and productivity. For example, even being just a bit depressed, I believe, can cause a person to have lowered mental functioning capacity (not to mention other health problems). We’ve probably all been there before. After an argument with a spouse or friend or just an overall bad day, we don’t always do our best work. When we’re bothered by something, imbalanced, or just depressed overall (and consistently), then we don’t perform optimally and in that way I can see how it’s not smart for biglaw. People may work hard and try harder, but it just doesn’t seem smart work to me. </p>
<p>Feel free to debate this guys. I’m just throwing it out there for perspective and discussion. I do know that many of the most successful companies are run in a way that has very worker friendly culture and yet they accomplish an amazing amount of high-quality and innovative work. For sure, Google is one of them. They have a forced “playtime” even if I remember correctly. lol. 
You’re asked to take relaxing and fun breaks. These periods of R&R (everyday) re-energize and recharge people’s batteries and improve their performance.</p>
<p>And these are some of the smartest people and companies around that do this.</p>
<p>I was watching a TED lecture recently too about what gets people to perform to their best and surprisingyl it’s NOT money/incentive. It’s the “opposite.” When you offer people more money and incentive to perform, every study has shown that they do WORSE. Why is that? And how can that be? </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y</a>
Here was the TED talk by Dan Pink (a former lawyer of all people!).</p>
<p>The studies (all of them going back decades) found that <strong>only</strong> in mechanical tasks that don’t require much complex mental or innovative creative work (something repetitive like stocking a shelf over and over) does a boss offering a significant reward improve performance. But when the tasks requires more dynamic thinking and complexity, then people do worse when offered more money or rewards for doing better. </p>
<p>Why? It’s bec</p>
<p>Some of the posts on this thread are very interesting.</p>
<p>Again, this is limited to my experience, but many of the successful Biglaw attorneys (and attorneys in smaller cities and at smaller firms) with whom I come into contact are very driven and clearly excited about doing a good job/winning/coming out on top. I have always believed that many of these attorneys would be similarly hard working no matter their chosen career path. Personally, I could get pretty excited about the prospect of getting to bed before midnight on a regular basis, but I can’t imagine that I would ever have been challenged and stimulated by any job of which I’m aware where I could regularly work from 9 to 5. </p>
<p>Just a note - many law firms do provide opportunities for regular outside activities and fitness. Here in NYC, many Biglaw firms either pay for attorneys to belong to local gyms or have private gyms built right into their buildings. It is also quite popular here to participate in the Lawyers Volleyball League (winter) or the Lawyers Softball League (summer) and similar team sports as well as the multitude of summer associate events during the warmer months. </p>
<p>A good number of attorneys (again, to my knowledge) also participate in outside activities in a big way - I know any number of marathon runners (myself included), local mayors, members of school boards, trustees at schools/universities, adjunct professors (I used to do this, too), active participants in bar associations, triathletes, youth sports coaches, etc. Particularly as you become more senior and you have more visibility into/control over your schedule, you can make time for outside activities. There are a lot of very “Type A” personalities in law, and it comes out in many facets of their lives.</p>
<p>I also prioritize my family, and as I write this, I can tell you that I went home tonight by 6 so that I could make dinner for my family and put my kids to bed. However, I immediately went into my home office where I still sit now. However, I can’t always work this way and this kind of evening would have been nearly impossible as a junior attorney.</p>
<p>I am a strong believer that when your time is limited by multiple demands, you become that much more efficient in everything you do. Having put myself through college by working three part-time jobs was great training for managing my time. Admittedly, I hardly ever watch TV except while I’m in the gym (and then it is usually something on demand) and finding time to balance my checkbook is, well, sorely lacking. Some things definitely fall through the cracks when you work these kinds of hours. </p>
<p>The reality is that the life of a Biglaw attorney is not for everyone. Go in with your eyes open. Understand that the demands on your time and your life will be immense. Before you take out so many student loans that working at Biglaw is your only option, make sure that you understand what that means for your life (or lack of a life outside the office). (I would also recommend taking a really hard look at whether the law school you want to attend gives you a reasonable shot at a job in Biglaw, if that is what you want or what you have to have.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly! The secret of happiness as a lawyer is to choose the area of practice that suits your personality (transactional or litigation), and choose the level of stress on which you thrive or that you can handle. Just like some cops want to work in the largest city with the most crime, others want to work in a quiet small town. Some doctors want to work the night shift at a big city ER, but others want to be dermatologists in the suburbs. At certain law schools, there is one certain path that seems to be the path that “everyone” wants. If you’re a top law student at a top school and don’t think the stress and/or the hours and/or the client base and/or the type of work of Big Law suits you, look for a job elsewhere.</p>
<p>Remember, however, that there are also jerky partners in small firms and in small towns…you may be just as likely to work for a huge jerk anyplace.</p>
<p>As for health, the 41 year old who died was slender and appeared healthy enough, but when he was getting ready for trial, he pretty much lived at work and consumed a diet of cigarettes and cookies. The people who have been hospitalized for exhaustion tend to gravitate toward the types of clients and deals that require all nighters. </p>
<p>You don’t have to wreck your health. You always have it within your power to eat right and get a touch of exercise. </p>
<p>Long hours and great demands do build camraderie.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You do understand, however, that the reason that Google provides chef-sponsored dinners is so that their employees do not go home for dinner. Instead, google invites the spouse/SO to bring the kids to the company cafeteria for dinner. The kids eat and go home with the SO/spouse. The ee goes back to work.</p>
<p>btw: Google also has stock options – something not available in a partnership.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So is I-banking and big consulting. So what? (The tradeoff for the huge signing bonuses and big time money is that they own you.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What really is inefficient – economically – is paying 25 year-olds with no marketable skills $160k to start. (And the market is finally realizing that fact.)</p>
<p>I recruited for Big Law in LA and I saw how the big machine churned and burned many bright young people. But for those that hung in there, it was a trade off. After five yrs, they paid off their loans and returned to whatever fly over state they hailed from and either joined the family biz there or bought themselves a McDonald’s franchise and lived happily ever after.</p>
<p>I also witnessed the mental breakdowns, eating disorders, I knew which bathroom to avoid after lunch and dinner, and even some tragedies like the Skadden Arps associate who died while assignment.</p>
<p><a href=“http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/in-re-the-passing-of-a-skadden-associate/[/url]”>http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/in-re-the-passing-of-a-skadden-associate/</a></p>
<p>Many a high achiever collapsed after weeks and weeks of zero sleep and mental exhaustion, they simply weren’t prepared to cope. Those that do make partner or after eight yrs are kindly asked to move on, or are made “of counsel.” </p>
<p>But the client who pays $600 an hr never saw any of this. The only thing they saw were the results. At Big Law that’s the bottom line. I can’t complain, I was well treated throughout my tenure, but now I am at smal time and I much prefer the pace, albeit, an entirely different struggle for clients. There’s always a trade off.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thank you very much for the link and your perspective and stories. </p>
<p>My heart honestly got a little sick and beating faster after reading the linked story. The author’s own personal anecdote was quite eye-opening.</p>
<p>I’m a little rattled right now. But, thank you.</p>
<p>We discussed that occurrence on this thread:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/1182161-biglaw-attorney-dies.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/1182161-biglaw-attorney-dies.html</a></p>
<p>There, I commented:
</p>
<p>Another poster had a very wise counterpoint:
</p>
<p>My H was in ‘biglaw’ for 20 years before being lured away by a client to be their General Counsel. Yes, the stories about long and unpredictable hours are true; the working through many weekends and holidays; the postponed vacations; the missed planned social events, etc. However, there are also many wonderful perqs that should probably be part of the discussion. </p>
<p>If you’d told my H and me at the beginning of him attending law school that we’d be in the position we are today, we never would/could have imagined it. The financial rewards are substantial and they have provided our family with a wonderful quality of life, nice home, nice cars, extensive travel, the ability to assist extended family, to financially support community causes and favorite charities at a high level, and probably most importantly, to allow our children to graduate from college, grad school, law school, and med school with zero debt.</p>
<p>No, biglaw isn’t for everyone, and clearly not all will even be afforded that option, but it can be a rewarding, challenging, and interesting career for someone who wants that type of practice. And as much as the awful hours are touted, keep in mind that it isn’t a 24/7 job. Yes, you will miss family dinners, etc., more so in your early years, but it doesn’t happen all the time and as you get further along in practice, you can control your time to a greater extent. One observation that we made early on, and that was also true for our ‘generation’ was that most biglaw partners had a stay at home spouse. That may not be as true today, but it was the case for many reasons for years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is nothing inefficient about it. Biglaw wants top talent; not run of the mill Directional State U JD.</p>
<p>For top talent, employers from numerous industries have to fight over to recruit. If Biglaw paid 80-90k to start, many wouldn’t even think of going to top law schools incurring 200k in debt; instead, most of top talent would go into I-banking, Consulting, F500, or hell, even accounting straight out of college, since cost/benefit analysis wouldn’t look favorably upon going into law. That would result in Biglaw firms ending up with the candidate pool, the caliber of which they wouldn’t want. 160k per year salary reflects this reality, and the opportunity cost incurred for attending law school; thus it is all market driven. </p>
<p>Regarding the original intent of this thread - Biglaw is objectively a very good job; probably much better job than over 90% of other jobs available for any college/ grad school grad working outside of I-banking, top consulting, medicine, or dentistry. Not only does Biglaw pay well, but the skill-sets, exclusive contacts, and experience you build at an elite Biglaw firm (especially in transactional side) would open numerous doors into other lucrative areas of business, including I-banking (restructuring, M&A, etc), sales/ business development, start-ups, in-house attorney positions, etc. </p>
<p>Some of the biggest names on Wall St were ex-Biglaw attorneys, including the Goldman CEO and the founding fathers of the legendary KKR. Being a Biglaw associate, if you play your cards right, would be an incredible start to someone’s career. Many times, success is highly dependent on who you know in the business; Biglaw does expose you to high-profile clients in high-powered industries.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. And the market is now speaking loud and clear. Even Harvard Law grads are under-unemployed. Or how about those so-called Big Law (Orrick) jobs in West Virginia? Or how about the report by NALP that Big Law salaries have declined from $160k to $145, which was the entry price in 2007. Or how about the fact that large law firms hired 4,800 Associates in '07, but approximately 60% that amount last year. Yes, the market at work. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Besides consulting – which also hires undergrads at large salaries, but is even more rare than Big Law – please name one other industry that would “fight over”…</p>
<p>I know from decades of personal experience that most of what has been said here, good and bad, is true. The point I’m afraid young people might miss, from this thread, is that being a small firm lawyer isn’t a whole lot easier. They have a somewhat more normal schedule, perhaps, but different problems and much less money to solve them with.</p>
<p>Two comments for young aspirants: (1) you really do have to be the kind of person who would work 100 hours a week, by choice, if dropped down into a dive shop in Belize. You can’t excel by self-flagellation when you are competing with people who just think it will be SO COOL to win this motion, or score points at this deposition, that they really don’t care what they have to do (or give up) to make it happen. They may be driven by some semi-nutty deep-seated feelings of wanting to prove that they are adequate, or whatever, but the bottom line is that they love it. You have to love it. (2) I think we are at a place in our nation’s economic history, with the price of higher ed and the overbuilt law schools/oversupply of young lawyers, that it’s the wrong field for anybody to enter today who will have to take on much debt. Assuming that you would love “the life” (and I know that sounds like Henry Hill in Goodfellas - there are some similarities) and you gain admission to a serious law school, you still have to go through a year or two of law school before you can find out if you’re even a candidate to grab the brass ring. If you’re taking on much debt per year, you’re financially locked in long before you find out whether you will be able to make it work, in the sense that life after law school will be tolerable while serving the debt. There are people who are fortunate enough to go through law school without debt, and they will have nicer options when they graduate. </p>
<p>Anybody smart enough and hardworking enough to succeed as a lawyer, could succeed in business, too. Don’t romanticize this one profession; it has enormous financial barriers to entry.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not Biglaw salaries being inefficient with regards to market. Only 30-40% of Harvard/ Wharton MBA’s get offers in I-banking and Consulting combined, each year. What that means is that more than half the people at top business schools don’t end up at places they’d like to be. Still, that doesn’t indicate market failure regarding salaries in I-banking or consulting. It is just the natural phenomenon: where elite employers lure large pool of strong candidates with top dollars, and take the best of that candidate pool. </p>
<p>Last time I checked, a JD from a top 10 school is a better bet of success than a BA from a top college, or even an MBA from a top b-school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I-banking, sales, trading, corporate finance, F500 leadership rotational jobs, Big4 accounting, IT consulting, and management consulting are some of the entry level jobs you can get straight out of college, all of which pay more than 60k/year to start. (many over 100k a year to start to fresh college grads) Biglaw needs to set its salary at the level they offer in order to attract the caliber of the candidate pool they would want at a healthy quantity.</p>
<p>Not going to debate the salaries, but it’s important to note that it is extemely difficult to obtain these high-paying jobs. The graduate has to have exceptional grades from a well-respected school before any of the other factors(internships, etc) even come into play. It’s really, really tough to get these jobs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I would argue that getting a Biglaw job is a lot easier than getting other elite jobs from other industries, such as I-banking, consulting, or scoring a high-end residency after med school.</p>
<p>All it takes to get Biglaw is to go to a top 10 school and end up at above median, after 1L. Compare that to the prospect of someone scoring a gig in I-banking or management consulting: even from the very top b-schools, only small % end up with such offers. </p>
<p>Also, the interviewing process for Biglaw is a joke; nothing but a 20-30 minute conversation about your resume, background, favorite food, or favorite sports team. Compare this to those rigorous, grueling interview process for consulting - where they use those ‘case interviews’, which require any serious candidate to prep months in advance to the interview date, to have any legitimate shot at success. At a firm such as McKinsey or BCG, for every 100 people they interview at first round, they end up giving one offer out of that pool. And, just to get the first round at top consulting firms, you basically need to be at a top college/ MBA. That is much more competitive than regular Biglaw recruiting out of top law schools.</p>
<p>NYULawyer: that law firms want to pay for top talent does not mean that their clients want to pay for it. Recall, please, that attorneys do not create value (unlike in other professions), no matter how talented they are. That is why many law firms are cutting back on their first-year associate hiring and are moving to lateral hiring. No matter how talented the untrained 25-year-old is, he’s an untrained 25-year-old and companies don’t really feel like paying $300 an hour for his time when they can pay $350 an hour for the time of someone who knows what the bloody hell he’s doing.</p>
<p>(Incidentally, in this overcrowded field, there’s no shortage of top talent, unless you mean those who have done federal appellate clerkships, including the Supreme Court, or have been with the DOJ.)</p>