Does anyone have any information on Sidley NY? Thank you!

Gibson Dunn, now sandwiched between two firms paying the $50K clerkship bonus. I wouldn't think Ted Olson would like that.

I would have expected to see White & Case higher than number 20 overall. They are the leading global firm.

Where is the Cochran law firm on this list?

Where's Willie Gary? He owns more aircraft than any firms on the Vault list.

It's strange Williams & Connolly never upped salaries after the latest round. Either it's a very cool place to work and doesn't need to raise, or it is seriously hurting.

Isn't it about time to start more NY to 190 rumors, demands, hints and allegations?

Does OMM do a retreat?

I know people think of GDC as a West Coast and DC firm, but I've worked a lot with their NYC office and the people are fantastic. Very nice and down to earth.

I have it on good authority that a V10 firm will move to $190 any day.

If you look at the historical data over the course of eight years almost 78% of lawyers entering these firms end up making lat moves. Of that number 65% end up in mid to small firms within ten years. The opportunity to end up where one desires exist after two to three years at a vault 100 when making the move. After that marketability decreases.

I love these 190 comments...I thought we were done with them?

I have it on better authority that 12:27 is wrong, unless "any day" is construed VERY broadly.

12:18: Wow. Can't stop laughing.

Any Sidley associates out there willing to provide info/opinions?

I went to Pepperdine. Where do I have a better chance of getting a job, OMM or GDC?

Responding to 12:18, OMM does a lot of firm-wide retreats. One for its LA summers (can't speak to other locations), one for first years/laterals, one for mid-levels (3rd and 4th year), one for counsel (6th year associates). Also, there are firm-wide departmental retreats that are something like every two years.

How else would you construe "any day"?

I second the concern pointed out by 12:13pm. How does Williams and Connolly think it can pay below market?

12:45: any day between now and the end of time, NY will indeed move to $190K.

2L : What do you want to know? I'm very happy at Sidley (as happy as one can be in Biglaw, in my opinion).

On an unrelated note, I was choosing between Sidley and White & Case, and was turned off by White & Case when every associate that interviewed me talked about how no one makes partner and exit opportunities - it may be a reality, but it's not very appealing to have someone try and recruit you to a place where they're making it clear they don't intend to be much longer.

Where is CWT? Bob Link's mustache is more prestigious than any of these piker firms.

I love GDC NY.

12:47: So the rumor is true.

One South Dearborn, what a sight!

Wow, OMM retreats more than the French army. We'll be lucky if we can ever book a room at the Ritz in Pasadena again....

12:48 Same thing happened to me when I was choosing between Sidley and White & Case. I am at Sidley - and QOL is probably the best it can be in BIGLAW. Sidley is a very humane place to work. The firm has reasonable billable hour expectations and offers real part time opportunities. Everyone who is hired is deemed capable of making partner. Of course, many people leave, but it is rare to find someone who leave for another Biglaw firm. Here in DC, if people leave Sidley it is to either leave DC altogether or to work for the government.

I Can't Believe You're Construing "Any Day"!

1:01, same goes for the Chicago office. I heard of one partner who left Sidley for Kirkland, but I've met more than one associate who left Kirkland for Sidley.

re Williams and Connolly....if you're a litigation boutique with one office (in DC no less) and you're vault #16, I think you can pretty much do what you want. People will go there regardless of whether they could make a little bit more bonus money somewhere else, because no other DC litigation shop is anywhere in the ballpark with them.

Fried Frank should be v5!

I'm surprised Gibson Dunn is only 18th, they act like they're at the top of the list when it comes to whom they'll hire as a lateral. (Yes, sadly, they turned me down because I only went to a second tier law school in NY, even though I was trying to leave a firm with a much better rank. I've since decided to stay at my better ranked firm.)

What do bonuses look like a Sidley? We heard lots of talk about Kirkland's bonuses last week, but I'm far more interested in Sidley. Any Sidley associates willing to shed some light on how the bonus structure works and what junior associates can expect?

Sidley pays market for each office. NY was a min of 2000 hours then full market bonus, practice groups could decide on "discretionary" above the market based almost entirely on hours, but it wasn't totally transparent. I think Chi was market there, with incremental increases based on hours, maxing out at NY levels.

I am 1:37- NY Sidley is a really nice place to work, relatively speaking, for Biglaw, just wanted to mention that too.

1:31:

GDC hires people from Loyola and Pepperdine all the time.

What is a "market bonus" in Chicago?

Either Sidley hires only people who write using the same style/voice, or there's some serious Sidley trolling going on here...

Let the eagle soar--I am 1:37/1:40, can't speak for the others though, so there are at least two "trolls" then by your count. It might actually be a decent work environment. Think whatever you want.

Williams & Connolly is all litigation and has almost no leverage (pretty much 1:1 partners-to-associates). Sure Wachtell pulls off the second pretty well, but litigation doesn't pay as well as big deals.

12:45,
These OMM retreats of which you speak-whereabouts might they be? Any place nice, perhaps even someplace ... ritzy?

I left Sidley to do gov work. I was miserable at Sidley, but probably less miserable than I'd be anywhere else. If some dire catastrophe hit me and I suddenly had to make more money I'd definitely go back. If you think of all BIGLAW as a hellpit, Sidley's probably one of the cooler spots within the pit.

Sidley is a great place to work! I can bill my anonymous blog posts to "recruiting" and "public relations" as long as I mention how great Sidley is, which it totally is, to work at, great, Sidley.

I don't really think there's any basis for saying that associate retention and partnership rates are higher at Sidley than they are at W&C. I don't know who you interviewed with, but I can almost guarantee that they were anomalies.

The only reason I didn't go running and screaming from BigLaw earlier than I did was because W&C was such a great place to work. The culture and the people are it's two best attributes - I haven't worked in a place before or since that had the same number of intelligent and socially-aware people.

It's focus on diversity is also a great plus. It was recently voted the best law firm to work for women.

Let the Eagle Soar, 1:05 here. As 1:37/1:40 notes, it might actually be a decent work environment. I don't know if Sidley conducts any sort of style/voice analysis prior to extending offers, but it does seem to seek out polite, civilized, "nice" types (or what some may consider intellectual or bookish).

1:41 - I bet they don't hire them for their NYC office.

1:06 - WC overall is undoubtedly the best litigation shop in DC. But to say that no one is in the "same ballpark" as WC is an overstatement. There are a number of great litigation shops in DC, who also, incidentally, pay market.

Responding to ubi, the OMM retreats are all over. The Lit department retreat was at a nice golf resort in Palm Springs, the first year retreat was at the Ritz in Pasadena, and the mid-level retreat was in DC at the Ritz as well.

On OMM generally, I'm not at all unhappy. The hours aren't crazy, the people are nice, and the work is cool. I compare my life to others' at biglaw firms and I'm sure I've done better in terms of work/life balance. The smaller OMM offices are a little harder (they always average more hours than the big offices) but they're also nice because they're more intimate, everyone knows each other. And they aren't branch offices in any way--a lot of big cases are run out of them using people from other offices, not the other way around.

I joined Sidley (Chicago) as a lateral this year, and it is definitely a great place to work. People are nice, hours have been really good, work is interesting. I don't know much about the bonuses, but I do recall there being a Sidley bonus memo posted here last December. I believe it listed 20K for 1st years hitting 2000. I don't know what the numbers were above that.

Was W&C voted "the best" place for women? I know there was recently a list of "best places" for women, and Sidley made that list as well.

Do any of the Sidley posters know about the San Francisco office?

Thanks, 2:08. That first year retreat at the Ritz in Pasadena sounds pretty cool. Why am I only hearing about this now? I'd've thought a commenter would have mentioned it earlier. Like, say, in last week's "Retreat" post. Someone droped the ball.

1:41 - Yes, GDC does hire people from second tier schools (like Loyola, etc). That being said, if you went to a second tier you have to be in the top 5% or so to get a job there from a second tier school.

2:09:

Would you mind sharing what general department you work in? (Dif. depts. can vary). Is the lit. department at Sidley is currently hiring?

Also, please define "really good" re hours. Working 9-6pm/7pm = really good? What are your "regualr" working hours?

Smallish. I like the people I've met from the office. Sorry, can't say more. Maybe a Sidley San Fran will comment.

Question about Williams & Connolly - do they really give their associates that much more responsibility on litigation or is that just the marketing? I know that all the firms on that list are doing the same sorts of litigation - both big complex commercial cases and white collar, etc..

As a market capitalist, I would think that if their litigation model worked better than other firms', those other firms would borrow it. So what's the real deal?

Gibson Dunn does hire from second-tier schools, but 1:31 is right that they're very grade-conscious. They'll take the top people from the lower-ranked schools, but they'll turn you down if you're in the middle of the class at a better school.

Hours: 8:30-6:15, no weekends.

It surprises me that GDC would be so grade-conscious for a lateral hire from a great firm with great experience - seems short-sighted to me. I admit I was top 15%, not top 5%, so perhaps that was the issue. But really, there are some great lawyers who didn't make the top 5%, and some lousy lawyers who did - you'd think they'd at least interview someone with the experience but not the grades.

2:47 --- as a market capitalist, you should know there are differing market niches, because not everyone has the same individual preference curves.

I have an interview with W&C, any suggestions?

Crazy as it sounds -- GDC made a former CA Supreme Court justice provide transcripts before joining the firm. Incidentally, GDC's stringent grade requirements are a large part of the reason the firm is lacking in diversity.

by W&C I mean White & Case, not Williams/Connolly...

clarification: as if that clears up who "you" are. There are two W&C firms in this thread. Call them by name.

God, you people are dumb...

3:09: Depends on the group. Some of the groups are better than others, but if you're in DC, and you're looking for a good place to work, you should probably go elsewhere. That W&C poster from before sounds suspiciously like the in-house recruiter. Most associates there are wonderful, but there is a huge partner associate divide and the quality of the work given to juniors is low. Great associate bonding though, based on group suffering.

3:17 - how many recruiters do you know that talk about running and screaming from BigLaw? Reading is fundmental, tiger.

I'm not a recruiter - I'm not even associated with W&C anymore. I left after my 5th year with the Lit/IP group in the NY office.

But you did have one good point - there is a big difference between the practice groups. The M&A group has a horrendous reputation, both on a partner and associate level. I was in the Litigation Department, and like I said above, I worked with some great people. The type of work you get as a junior associate will depend on how aggressively you seek out the work you want to do. The quiet, unassuming folks get the massive, boring cases and the others get picked for the more juicy, interesting ones.

Oh, and you should ask about opportunities to go to one of their foreign offices. The fact that there are a ton of offices around the world is one of W&C's good selling points.

White & Case DC's litigation/arbitration group is very poorly managed with too much work handled by too few partners. End result - associates get screwed near deadlines because partners are too busy to devote their attention to matters until it's way past the 11th hour.

3:06 - now we're getting somewhere.

The DC litigation departments of #16-19 self-identify themselves as in the same market niches - others (like Fried Frank perhaps) may pride themselves on burying the litigation before it gets to court, but these firms (at least the DC offices) claim to go to court. If this assumption that they are in the same market niches is correct, how do they differ in how associates get experience? If these firms are not in the same market niche, why not? Does the counsel of Acme save the trial work for Williams & Connelly (contrary to other firms' claims)?

Or were you just being snarky?

GDC is absurdly grade conscious - more so than I've seen just about anywhere else. It's like they're holding themselves out as some sort of Cravath wannabe. The result of gdc's intense grade scrutiny is that they alienate a lot of very qualified candidates.

2:47 - I was referring to niche as a functional, not a formalist, term, i.e. the firms self-identification means very little to the analysis to the extent that it is not actually accurate. In practice, I think W&C offers something different to employees than the other firms. I'm not saying better, just different, which appeals to some and matters less to others.

I haven't actually worked at W&C, but friends who have truly believe they get more trial experience earlier. To some people this matters more than others. To the extent that both sets of people make good attorneys in different ways, one model will not necessarily outcompete the other.

The story that I heard about the CA Supreme Court Justice was that he was so offended by the request that he didn't end up going to GDC at all. Gibson has a long and esteemed history of rejecting or otherwise pissing off overqualified applicants: in addition to the judge, there's the obvious SOC, and apparently also Ken Starr at one point. Of course, with those two I doubt that grades were the issue...

Funny...I chose White and Case over Sidley for the exact same reasons the other poster chose Sidley over White & Case.

5:07, what's "the obvious SOC"? Care to elaborate on GDC's history? I'm considering interviewing there in the fall.

5:51: GDC failed to hire Justice O'Connor way back when, allegedly offering her a secretary position instead. 5:07: As for Ken Starr, allegedly he demanded to come back to the firm (from the Reagan admin) as a full share partner- i.e. the highest compensated level of partner. However, GDC has a firm policy that all partners start at the same level initially and their respective shares are adjusted based on their book of business each year.

Is it better to be the firm that offered SOC at least some type of job, even if a demeaning one, or to be one of the firms (SOC's bio says she interviewed with several CA firms) that simply didn't offer her a job at all?

6:18: I guess it depends on how you look at it. SOC graduated third in her class (of 102) at Stanford Law in two years (rather than three). If another firm didn't offer her a job at all, at least they can say that they didn't look at her transcript, etc. With Gibson Dunn, you know that they saw how brilliant she was and wanted her to work there, but didn't want to treat her as an equal, so they offered her a job as secretary in the hopes that she would do their work for them and not get credit for it.

Personally, I would be more offended by the secretary position than the non-offer.

ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO RESPONDED LEGITIMATELY TO THE OMM RETREAT QUESTION ARE TOO STUPID TO LIVE!!!

They have a rockin' retreat in Pasadena. Did I mention they have a killer retreat in Pasadena? At the Ritz in Pasadena!

That's right. I'm the idiot who posted this originally, and I'm still mocking you.

Re: Gibson & SOC

While it makes for an interesting (and, for GDC, embarrassing) anecdote, given the eventual trajectory of Justice O'Connor's career, it doesn't mean a whole lot. Simply put, it was a different time back then. GDC was hardly the only firm to turn her down and probably not the only one to offer her an "alternative" position. Women were still experiencing the same difficulties as late as the 1970s & 1980s (and, to some extent, even today). The relevant conversation is not about what a bad firm GDC was (as just about every top firm would have responded similarly at the time), but rather what a remarkable and progressive firm it was that ultimately hired her...

I used to be Sidley SF - the hours during the week could be crushing, but I really, truly worked very few weekends.

Does anyone know what the hours are like at LA Gibson?

I'm not a big fan of GDC DC's politics, but a female partner at another firm told me that it used to be routine to ask female candidates questions about their husband's job stability (i.e., because the candidate's job stability was assumed to be dependent on where the husband works and lives) and that many firms had an open and strict policy of not hiring female attorneys. Therefore, I would have to agree with 6:50. It doesn't really make sense to make job decisions based on the one extremely public example of a firm making a stupid and discriminatory decision, when many others make illogical and unfair decisions every day.

OMM had a summer associate from Pepperdine this past fall. I don't think GDC did.

Earlier comments are correct: if you're at a 2nd tier school in LA (i.e., Loyola, Pepperdine, Southwestern) you'd better be in the top 5% to get considered by any of the big players in town (OMM, GDC, Latham, Skadan).

I worked at GDC in New York and LA and had a generally positive experience. The SOC incident is obviously embarrassing but, despite some lingering diversity issues, the firm is not the same now as it was then. The D.C. office has a well-earned reputation for being very conservative (but also, thanks to Olsen, Estrada, and Gene Scalia, for being brilliant), but the other offices are much more liberal. 7:48-- the hours at the L.A. office are quite reasonable; usually 8:30-6:30 or so. When I was there they definitely worked less than the NY office, though I think that has changed somewhat since.

Newsflash....most of the top 20 firms in NYC are pretty grade-conscious. If you dont have a 3.3 or better at a tier one school you probably wont get offers from a lot of the top 20 firms.

I summered in Sidley's Chicago office this year and apparently something like 75 out of the 96 summers want to do litigation work, while only half of the available first-year spots are in litigation groups (but they haven't given us any actual numbers, just vague allusions). A couple weeks ago they announced that "some of you who preference litigation groups might be asked to start out in corporate/transactional" ... as if it wasn't a big deal at all. OK fine, these things happen, right? But they won't tell us what group we've been placed in until shortly before we start NEXT FALL. A lot of summers are pissed off, scared, and planning to go through OCI this month. It's ashame, because other than the deplorable way Sidley has handled this situation, they seem like a great firm. I'd love to stay, but I don't know that I can take the chance of finding out a few weeks before I'm supposed to start work next year that I have been assigned to a transactional group, in which case I'd be frantically scrambling to find another job. I really had no idea how the hiring/group selection process worked until this summer. If I had known about this last year at this time, it may have factored into my calculus when I was weighing other offers. Definitely something to be wary of for the rising 2L's going through OCI in the next month.

Any other firms (or different Sidley offices) have this litigation/transactional imbalance problem this summer?

Word on the street in Chicago was that Sidely had more summers than they expected this year. Good, I suppose, in that it suggests that Sidley is a "hot" firm, but bad for the reasons SidleySummer articulates. Also, I heard that Sidley Chicago gave office assignments to their summers based on their law school ranking -- i.e., summers from Harvard or Chicago had offices with windows, while summers from Northwestern worked in windowless offices. Sounds too farfetched to be true, but perhaps SidleySummer can confirm or clarify?

8:10 - I think continuing to ridicule GDC for the SOC incident is a good way to make firms today think twice before doing something normal but equally stupid. I don't think it should be the deciding factor, but just because GDC wasn't the only one doesn't mean they shouldn't be making up for it (which I don't think they've done enough of). It may well come down to GDC and another firm for me, and if the other firm is better for women and minorities, I'll be sure to tell GDC's recruiter.

11:50 -- no offense, but I doubt that a firm that turns away profitable lateral partners for not having adequate law school grades is going to pay much attention to whether one potential recruit rejects them based on the SOC incident. If you are really serious about thinking that GDC has not done enough to remedy its past wrongs, I don't know why you would consider them in the first place.

I never detected any "law school influence" re: those who got windowless vs. windowed offices at Sidley Chicago. Everybody's usually in a window office within 8 months anyway.

I am a big Sidley fan - worked there for 2 years, went off to clerk for a year, and will be returning this fall (and I'm thrilled they raised the bonus to 50K even for those (like me) who had already accepted).

The people are down to earth and realistic about what they do, and part-time does seem to be a real option. They bill themselves as a civil, collegial firm and I think they walk the walk. My 2 cents.

Re Sidley NY - People probably think it's a troll, but its not. It is a great place to work, and I really like it. But as most people say, it is the "coolest pit in hell", but no more. It is not some magical place either! It's still BigLaw people, they still make you work until 4 am sometimes, though it is great.

As a PS, I chose among Sidley, Mayer, Shearman and White & Case. I made the right choice.

I'm at Sidley DC - Sidley Chicago had a WAY larger summer class than they were expecting (probably by 20 slots). We were told that there were 20+ summers from University of Chicago alone.

Not every Sidley office works the way Sidley Chicago does - the DC office does not require you to pick a practice group until you start and even then it is amorphous. Sidley DC is about 70% litigation with virtually no transactional work. The remaining 30% of the firm is regulatory (e.g. FDA, Health Care, banking) and International Trade.

(8/20) 9:56 PM: There was no "law school influence" at Sidley Chicago for window v. windowless offices. Many lower ranked T1 summers had a window, as did one of the only T4 summers. It was a mostly random process, though practice area interests (which determined floors) and arrival/departure dates may have been factors. Did it sting to walk past a Harvard summer with a window office, sure, but then you'd pass by one sitting in a windowless office - whatever. That all said: it was a huge summer class, and having 90+ window (i.e. "associate") offices vacant for three months would be a sign of a poorly run ship. (And come on, it's not like summers lived in their offices.)

As for the litigation/transactional group situation, two things. First, as of a few weeks ago, it was still unclear as to how many lit-oriented summers had secured clerkships. Any summer so elite as to gasp at the thought of working a few months in a transactional group should land a clerkship and, with next summer's adjustment, there will be ample spots in litigation groups (and they get to be summers, again!). Second, summers were not simply told "you might have to work in corporate for a while." They also might work in reorg/bankruptcy (i.e. litigation) or environmental (part litigation).

This is not to minimize the concerns of litigation-bound summers, just some perspective. If it makes them feel any better, though transactional types certainly felt the love all summer, we now get to watch as the economy goes off a cliff, possibly taking us with it.

Sidley, Sidley, Sidley! We get mints on our chairs every day and complementary foot rubs every night!

Sorry, Sidley troll - if you're working 8 to 6 with no weekends, you're either a secretary or your firm has absolutely no work. BigLaw associates in NYC work long hours. Period.

9:10: Who said anything about "working 8 to 6," let alone exclusively "in NYC"? I'm sensing some hostility.

"Hours: 8:30-6:15, no weekends.
Posted by: Sidley | August 20, 2007 02:53 PM"

I was wrong about the NYC comment though - it think the poster was talking about Chicago. Even still, I highly doubt associates in any BigLaw offices work those hours.

I am sensing some serious Sidley.

The heavy litigation imbalance is not unique to this year. I know that the transactional side hired 3Ls last year to try and correct the imbalance and that they interviewed 3Ls for transactional positions this year. I also know that the incoming class had the same stress about practice groups, but everyone I know got their practice area of choice, at least in terms of transactional vs. litigation. Last year's summer class was not as bloated, so that may make it more difficult to accomodate preferences this year.

I know a few people who have switched practice groups after being at the firm for a year. If you do quality work and there are positions available, you can move.

I seriously doubt that the potential economic colapse will take down the transactional practices at any of the top Biglaw firms. It may bolster bankruptcy practices, but there will still be plenty of work for corporate/RE monkeys. At least it better, or I'm in trouble.

Agreed, Sidley Spammer. Those are not the hours I see in Chicago, at least not on a daily basis.

Hmmmm . . . somehow the word "envy" disappeared from the last line of my 10:15 post. I should say that "I am sensing some serious Sidley envy."

8-6 everyday (with no lunch) gets you about 45 hrs/week. If you do that for 48 weeks, you get 2160 hours. I shoot for about 2000 hours so I can get the bonus, so that gives me some cushion.

No one has yet complained about my hours.

Does 2160 put you on partnership track? Do you work litigation or transactional?

Future sidley associate:

To my knowledge, it does put me on partnership track. At reviews, they do mention the possibility of partnership. If it turns out that this doesn't put me on track, so be it.

I'm in transactional.

11:50 - Regarding GDC and SOC: if you are concerned about professional development for women and minorities, why wouldn't you consider who has made partner in the NY office over the last five years, rather than focusing on something that happened over fifty years ago? There may be nits to pick about GDC, but that's not one of them. Wherever you consider working, I encourage you to base your decision on the operating realities on the ground, rather than stale anecdotes.

Former Sidley SF 6:52, which practice group were you? I was in corporate, and I think I had only three or four weekend DAYS off in two plus years. We worked almost every saturday AND sunday.
I hear what others are saying about the pleasant Sidley culture. The partners in other offices and other practice groups were super nice and pleasant, but the partners I worked for in SF corporate . . . no one called them pleasant.
If you really were in the SF office, you'd know about this. We SF corporate associates complained openly about our rough treatment to everyone we met.
It's been a few years for me. Maybe things have changed, but I doubt it.

Wow, I had no idea my fellow Sidley Chicago summers spent all day on abovethelaw too. For what it is worth, I attend Harvard and have an interior office. The humiliation is practically unbearable.

Luscious lunches. $25+/head. SAs salary. $3,000/week. Humiliating HLS students. Priceless.

The reality is that Gibson NY (where I worked) is extremely female-friendly, there are many more women there percentage-wise than at a lot of other firms, there are a good number of women on powerful committees, and the office is in front of the curve in terms of rectruitment of women, maternity benefits, etc.

"Hours: 8:30-6:15, no weekends."

Impossible in biglaw. When you are junior, partners or other associates will all you at 6pm. When you are more senior, clients will call you at 6pm.

Plus, not every hour during the week is billable. You'll have really slow weeks; you'll have nonbillable things to do.

"The reality is that Gibson NY (where I worked) is extremely female-friendly."

I don't know how it is at the New York office, but the DC office is decidedly NOT female-friendly.

I'm an ex-Sidley CHI associate, and I can tell you I was miserable there. I was billing 2400+ for 2+ years until I quit. That being said, as with just about every BIGLAW firm, QOL depends on your group. Giving my group away will give me away, but I will say I was transactional.

Now, life is far from perfect at my new firm. I'm happier, but still working more than I want. People at Sidley are pretty cool (for BIGLAW), which is not always the case at other places (like my new firm). At the end of the day, however, I prefer the work I'm doing now, and I'm seeing my family more, so I'm happy I made the move.

BTW, "Hours: 8:30-6:15, no weekends"=BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Sorry, but no way.)

I'm an ex-Sidley CHI associate, and I can tell you I was miserable there. I was billing 2400+ for 2+ years until I quit. That being said, as with just about every BIGLAW firm, QOL depends on your group. Giving my group away will give me away, but I will say I was transactional.

Now, life is far from perfect at my new firm. I'm happier, but still working more than I want. People at Sidley are pretty cool (for BIGLAW), which is not always the case at other places (like my new firm). At the end of the day, however, I prefer the work I'm doing now, and I'm seeing my family more, so I'm happy I made the move.

BTW, "Hours: 8:30-6:15, no weekends"=BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Sorry, but no way.)

I recommend looking at the recently released American lawyer associate satisfaction rankings. However, since all it takes to make the rankings is 10 responses, and many of the firms listed are therefore non-national small firms that many law students haven't heard of, aren't going to be looking at, and/or don't live in the same city as, I present for your edification a Top 10 for associate satisfaction for US firms with more than 600 attorneys (# of attorneys based on the most recent ALJ 250, which lists 63 firms with more than 600 attorneys):

(1) Latham & Watkins
(2) Orrick
(3) Gibson, Dunn
(4) Weil, Gotshal
(5) Sullivan & Cromwell
(6) O'Melveny & Myers
(7) Alston & Bird
(8) Paul, Hastings
(9) Arnold & Porter
(10) DLA Piper

(Relevant for this board because Gibson and OMM are on the list.)

Also, I'm a huge fan of the mid-sized New York offices of non-New York-based firms. They tend to do more than just service financial sector giants (at least in litigation), and associates seem generally happier and more valued as individuals. (On the Vault 15-20, Gibson NY, Williams & Connolly NY and OMM NY fit the bill.)

Some kind-of-empirical data to back that up - below is a Top 10 for associate satisfaction for New York offices with more than 125 attorneys (culled from AMLAW NY-office specific rankings, # of attorneys in New York office based on the most recent NYLJ 100, which lists 65 firms with NY offices over 125 attorneys):

(1) Gibson, Dunn (160)
(2) Goodwin Procter (142)
(3) Clifford Chance (308)
(4) Orrick (205)
(5) Morrison & Foerster (161)
(6) McDermott Will (153)
(7) Patterson Belknap (192)
(8) Akin Gump (163)
(9) Kirkland & Ellis (258)
(10) Latham & Watkins (332)

Notice how: (1) These offices are all in the low-300s and below in terms of number of lawyers in the office, with most in the 150-200 range; and (2) Though there are a number of huge firms here, except Patterson Belknap not one of these is a New York-based firm.

3:51 - there is no NY office of Williams & Connolly. Perhaps you meant Sidley?

My bad, thanks for the correction. I was actually thinking Covington, which is obviously not in the Vault 15-20 but isn't far from it, and seems to have a nice, mid-sized NY office.

At almost 400 lawyers, it's quite a stretch to call Sidley NY mid-sized, but I guess it's not THAT much more of a stretch than saying the same about Latham NY, which I did.

Bottom line is that 7/10 on the NY Top 10 are in the 140-205 range, which is honestly more what I think of when I think mid-sized, but of course it's a sliding scale.

Given that firm rankings are partially-dependent upon associate satisfaction scores, and associates have an incentive to see their respective firm's ranking rise, I'm surprised that Rankings guy and others are not more circumspect.

i work at sidley chicago. Hours are 8am-7pm, with 10 hours on the weekend. Still a great place to work

Anonymous 5:31 -- Former CA Supreme Court Justice currently works in GDC's Orange County office.

omm retreats
1st year - pasadena ritz
midlevel - dc ritz
6th year - ny ritz
last firm-wide litigation retreat - jw marriott palm springs.

i'd say these are some pretty nice places, but retreats aren't going to keep you at the firm. the day to day is the important stuff. and day to day, omm in downtown la is a great place to work.

I don't know if anyone is paying attention to this thread anymore, but I thought I'd put my 2 cents in regarding Gibson Dunn. (I'm an associate in the NY office).

1. SOC: It was a long time ago, I'm sure EVERY firm did stuff like this, and the only reason this story goes around so much is because Gibson happened to do it to someone who happened to become an amazing supreme court justice. No excuse, and it's embarassing, but still...

2. Retreats: We have INCREDIBLE retreats. Don't know what O'Melveny's retreats are like, but we just had our "all attorney retreat" (they happen every couple of years) where they flew everyone to Palm Springs for a long weekend (and literally EVERYONE goes). A few of the speakers: Bob Woodward, Lance Armstrong, Terry McAuliffe (and MORE!). For the entertainment the last night, we had Jennifer Hudson and a personal prerecorded address from Stephen Colbert. It was pretty incredible.

3. The grade cutoffs are really stupid. All the associates hate them. Only the old school partners still want the grade cutoffs. STUPID STUPID STUPID!!! I think they're coming around, but change is a slooooow process.

4. The NY office is a great place to work with really great people, and it's getting better in terms of diversity too. I also think it's pretty female friendly.

Last . . .