Options for Incoming Orrick First Years
On Tuesday, we were able to tell you that Orrick would be giving a $75K stipend to 3Ls who are willing to defer for a year. We are now able to bring you additional information on Orrick's plan for its incoming first year associates.
First and foremost, we understand that the $75K stipend is available only if 3Ls are able to secure a public interest or government fellowship. 3Ls received a memo from Orrick which listed some organizations that are hiring. But if you can't get a job, you can't get the money.
That said, the firm is open to suggestions. We talked with an Orrick spokesperson who said that the firm would look at any suggestions that 3Ls had for fellowship options. The firm will look at it on a case-by-case basis, looking at whether the job will give the 3Ls good legal training. The firm has put a full time pro-bono manager in charge of helping incoming first years get placements at other organizations. Speaking about the 3Ls, the spokesperson said that the firm likes all of the people that have offers to return to the firm: "We want them back."
But that isn't the only option for incoming first years. Details after the jump.
3Ls heading to Orrick are invited to better-deal the firm if they can. Orrick is giving people the option of taking some money and running. As one tipster puts it, Orrick will give you $18,500 to:
Go away and never come back.
Gollum.
An Orrick representative tells Above the Law that the $18,500 is in addition to a $15,000 bar stipend. Start dates for some Orrick first years will be January 2010. Others are looking at March 2010. Orrick felt that it had to give incoming first years the option of leaving Orrick and looking for another opportunity. Firm spokespeople emphasize that this program is not Orrick's way of encouraging people to leave the firm. That is why the "transition stipend" is less than the deferral option. Orrick would rather incoming 3Ls take the fellowship and come on board in 2010.
Are there 3Ls that think that they can get a better job than what Orrick is offering them in 2010?
We expect to see more and more firms come up with creative options for their incoming first years if the economy doesn't show significant improvement by the fall.
(155) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
first to say orrick sucks
First and Second years: Do not despair. If you have been laid off, I may hire you. I am a partner at a bankruptcy boutique firm that represents dozens of companies that are going out of business. My clients need bodies that will assist them with liquidation and fire sales. If you can stock shelves and do freight loading, I may have some temp assignments starting out at $20 an hour. I know it's not $160K a year but at least you will be doing something productive rather than rotting away in self-pity and depression. As a bonus, my HR dept. will help you with your law school loan forebearance applications. Stay tuned.
First and Second years: Do not despair. If you have been laid off, I may hire you. I am a partner at a bankruptcy boutique firm that represents dozens of companies that are going out of business. My clients need bodies that will assist them with liquidation and fire sales. If you can stock shelves and do freight loading, I may have some temp assignments starting out at $20 an hour. I know it's not $160K a year but at least you will be doing something productive rather than rotting away in self-pity and depression. As a bonus, my HR dept. will help you with your law school loan forebearance applications. Stay tuned.
$18,500 to "Go away and never come back"?....
...huh... I make that in a couple months coming while on my back!
What do you think is the significance of the January vs. March groups? Discuss.
Fact. March comes later than January.
Beets. Bears. Battlestar Galatica.
4~
That is the best post of your schtick so far. I am highly entertained, keep it up.
I've heard that the few 3Ls starting in Jan are "high priority" and anyone starting in March is being given a not so subtle message to either take the stipend or leave.
Yeah, that's what the *structure* seems to be saying, but that's not what the *firm* says when you talk to them.
Also noteworthy: The bar stipend for those starting in January and those in (late) March is exactly the same.
Orrick is falling apart.
Elie, can you make a chart of firms whose summer programs are being cut to 8 weeks?
Good thinking 12. Better yet, a wall of shame of firms that haven’t told their summers the dates of their summer employment.
i plan on accepting five offers of employment next year. that way i'll at least have one job by the time i graduate.
*reads up on how to clone self 4 times for 2L summer*
-nervous T-10 1L
soon to be nervous T-10 1L times 5!!!
ha nervous, I can't believe how lame you are. I hope you're a hot girl b/c you're gonna have a tough time getting people to like you. No offense to the feminists on here.
14, you should also try to collect ~$20k from each of the other four offers that you regretfully decide not to take. They should be able to at least beat Orrick's $18.5k.
:(
*goes back to reading V5 lawyer profiles*
-nervous T-10 1L
soon to be nervous 1L sa
hahahha how are you so lame. O man you must be a chick. Usually, chicks aren't funny.
Orrick is indeed unraveling. How long will gross mismanagement be allowed to carry the day in the SF office?
Also, Orrick's latest round of layoffs disproportionately effected the "diverse" associates they love to take such pride in. Oh well, as long as they are given more meaningless diversity awards every year, who cares about keeping these actual people on the payroll?
Nervous,
Seriously....can you please just shut up? People are getting sick of you. I have been sick of you since your first whiny little comment.
You're making law students look like pathetic little wimps.
I am half man half penguin. Hire me.
I hope Nervous reveals him or herself upon graduation. Are Michigan Law students trying to figure out who he/she is?
I don't think there's any significance to the January v. March start dates. Some 3Ls were given March start dates because of the practice groups they were assigned to.
Would you rather (a) be stuck on an island with nervous (man he/she would be even more nervous) or (b) make out with steve buscemi?
Latham's $75k offer = first come, first served & no questions asked. It doesn't matter what you do for the year (e.g., you can play PS3 all day for the entire year and you still get the money as long as you were one of the earlier ones to volunteer at your office). Most offices are aiming for ~30% deferrals.
23--come on, how in the world does that make sense?
I hope all the 3Ls are interpreting this policy as they must: Januarys might possibly have a chance to return, but Marches have none. To think otherwise is the sort of total delusion that will make you easy prey at the O. Use your heads, guys, why would you trust this firm now?
California Rankings
1) Gibson
2) Munger
3) Irell/Quinn
4) Latham (lucky to be here) / Skadden
5) O'Melveny / Paul Hastings
California rankings:
1) nobody cares.
how do ppl view jones day in california?
23 here. March people do have a chance to return: on March 29, 2010 or after their fellowship. People who were put in certain transactional groups that have gotten particularly slow now have been told they can start in March. Busier groups will be taking on their first years in January. There's nothing more to read into it.
29, not well buddy, not well. In fact, when us Californians see a Jones Daysian, we get blisters.
Orrick treats its employees like shit. This is disgraceful. Their whole song and dance about being better than the sweatshops of the v20 firms is absurd. Less substantive work, less prestige, less respect... and what do they have to show for it? Six weeks of severance or a payoff for rescinding offers. Jesus.
In honor of Orick, I would liek to Officially Onnounce my debute here in teh ATL comment section. How do like my "O" face?
Have people always viewed Pillsbury as a TTT, or is it just getting bashed because of its recent layoffs and the Acela partner's lack of tact?
Jones Day --- more prestigious than LaTTTham now?
Dude. Get with it. Pillsbury has ALWAYS been TTT. Dont chu know? They do muffins, not law.
Pillsbury has been a TTT for a while - the merger a few years back went horribly
The date for the March 2010 start date is 3/29. This is effectively an April 2010 start date.
March 29th??? What, because they thought April 2010 sounded particularly bad next to 3/29? It's a case of "Three easy payments of $9.99" if I've ever heard one.
35, yes. Jones Day did not lay off half its first years.
23--you're really shameless. Why would you expect there to be work for those transactional people in March 2010 that wouldn't be there in January 2010? That big annual February bump in Corporate, eh? Please, don't insult your 3Ls' intelligence. Orrick obviously can't even predict how much they are going to lose even 5 months out....if they could, then they would have done a much more enormous layoff in November.
Any Orrick 3L told to come "March 29, 2010" who actually believes they have a job waiting is a total SUCKA who probably deserves to be taken advantage of by the Orrick Ministry of Disinformation.
Will Orrick even exist on March 29, 2010???
What would you have them do, 41? Those 3L's have no other prospects at this point.
Did someon mention Pilsbury? Can someone pass a brotha a cookie log? Num, num...pass.
41 - All I meant was that being given a start date of January as opposed to March does not indicate anything about any 3L's performance. It just means that there will be work for that person in January.
42--I'm telling them not to count on Orrick to fulfill half-formed promises. It would be a terrible mistake to accept an offer to return to Orrick in late March 2010 and not make multiple contingency plans.
The firm's absurd refusal to simply admit there is priority given to those invited back in January over those invited back in March should make clear that they are shameless in their dissembling. To treat 3Ls this way is just deplorable. 3Ls use your heads!
What do people think of these fellowship options that Orrick and Latham are offering?? Smart idea for 3Ls?
I hope Orrick stays afloat. I don't want some of those scumbag partners coming to my firm in the aftermath!
44--how can you really say that you know where the work will be in a year's time? If you have such uncanny predictive powers, why is the firm so badly miscalculating the number of associates they have for the amount of work they anticipate, thus necessitating these MASSIVE, HISTORIC layoffs?
Anyone who would trust a firm that has just laid off 20% of its associates (1 in 5 associates gone in 5 months people!) about how much work will be available in a particular practice group one year from now deserves whatever they get from the O swamp.
Screw Orick !!! I will be taking them to the supreme court in order to show them the fine art of THE CONTRACT.
DLA Piper is still (f)(h)iring ?
We are all expendable ....create your own world and KILL the BIG LAWyers
Screw Orick !!! I will be taking them to the supreme court in order to show them the fine art of THE CONTRACT.
DLA Piper is still (f)(h)iring
We are all expendable ....create your own world and KILL the BIG LAWyers
Screw Orick !!! I will be taking them to the supreme court in order to show them the fine art of THE CONTRACT.
DLA Piper is still (f)(h)iring
We are all expendable ....create your own world and KILL the BIG LAWyers
Streaks on the china,
never mattered before,
who cares.
When you dropped kicked your jacket
As you came through the door,
No one glared.
But sometimes things get turned around
And no one's spared.
All hands look out below
there's a change in the status quo.
Gonna need all the help that we can get.
According to our new arrival
Life is more than mere survival
We just might live the good life yet.
50/51, right on!! when BigLaw implodes definitively, only fresh ideas and new thinking about this industry will matter. All hail guerrilla law!
Yes, its so easy to pick up a public interest "fellowship" or job. This "offer" is really for shit. It's no mean feat to get a decent public interest gig in a good economy, presumably when you have a 1L summer PI job and usually some solid pre-law school experience. Its also an insult to public interest lawyers
Wow, what a crap firm. Orrick is hoping that people see this as equal to Latham's offer when in fact it's much worse. March 29, 2010? That's retarded.
White & Case round 2.
sooooo....how do i be a good sa? also, anyone else going to skeeps tonight?
*takes out notepad and post it pen*
-nervous T-10 1L
soon to be nervous 1L sa
the $75K offer means that the deferred 3Ls return in jan 2011 (the offer says that you can only begin your public interest position in jan 2010 and it has to be for 1 yr)...which is presumably after the current 2L summer associates will start.
BREAKING BREAKING BREAKING BREAKING::::::
CRAVATH: 3 start date options.
First start date is OCTOBER 26th, but they have options for mid-November and mid-January as well. They pay for all bar expenses and moving expenses, plus $3000 signing bonus, plus $7500 advance.
I'm not surpised at Orrick's behavior, given my one dealing with them. I had an on campus interview with Orrick at Harvard back in the fall of 2002. Given my grades, etc., on paper I would have been considered a "top candidate" -- the type of student that would essentially have to show up drunk at the on-campus interview and call back interview not to get an offer. The firm had rented a suite at the Charles Hotel. Students were invited to have coffee in the suite while waiting for the interviewing partner to come greet you. I waited for about five minutes, when in walked in the woman who was doing the on-campus interview. I went up to shake her hand. Yet, instead of shaking my hand, this woman took a sharp left turn in order to grab an eu claire from the mini-dessert tray. That was all I needed to know about Orrick, a firm that is simply living up to my expectations of them now.
Just putting in word of praise for Elie: you've done a great job staying on top of all this news. You seem like a decent guy and maybe I'll see you at an ATL event in NYC sometime. The amount of vitriol in the comments here is absurd.
- HLS 3L
57 - Kneepads & no natural gag reflex
Elie does seem to have righted the ship after returning from Vegas.
can anyone confirm the Cravath 3L start dates?
anyone else studying for tomorrow's mpre right now?
Fabrice Eboue has commented on French television that "feminism is not just for authoritarian or sexually frustrated women.....". It is not Fabrice Eboue who is running this site, that's for sure.
Fabrice Eboue has commented on French television that "feminism is not just for authoritarian or sexually frustrated women.....". It is not Fabrice Eboue who is running this site, that's for sure.
Fabrice Eboue has commented on French television that "feminism is not just for authoritarian or sexually frustrated women.....". It is not Fabrice Eboue who is running this site, that's for sure.
THanks for the support fellas. I really am trying hard to work on my gramar and spelling mistakes, but it is hard when Lat is always trying to get up in me (that's what he said!).
If you're starting in January, the firm is interested in keeping you. If you're starting in April 2010, uh, I mean March 2010, the firm wants nothing to do with you. Simple as that. The Orrick troll trying to convince people otherwise is probably Ralph Baxter's personal assistant.
Anybody want to guess how much weight Karen J-M in SF has gained?
Despite all her attempts to hide it with those long jackets her ass just keeps getting bigger and bigger. NASTY.
I think it's a contest between her ego and her ass?
Anyone have any thoughts?
Dear MysTTTal (the commenter)
lolz. keep it up.
New Law Firm Rule: When you've laid someone off, you are no longer allowed to use them in the "[insert ethic group here] people work here too!" pictures on your website.
Tacky.
nervous--I'll be at skeeps!! What's the age of consent in Michigan?
~17-year old Ann Arbor High school senior.
Keep they mutha f#$in heads ringin.
--DRE
Why won't Orrick offer the "fellowship" option to the First Year's who they just laid off and let them come back in 2010? It's not like there's any better jobs out there right now anyway.
Hilarious. . . and it's on their homepage.
http://www.orrick.com/news_events/releases.asp?action=article&articleID=8210
uh, #60, not defending orrick, but get over yourself! i'm pretty sure an eclair is better than you.
72: let's go to skeeps ;)
Hey, are the people that Orrick fired removed from the website, yet? I am wondering if a couple of law school classmates still have their jobs.
67:
That's what he said, right? Because of gay.
78-no
Does anyone else recall that this is what Brobeck did? Offered its first years $ to not come...those that took the offer were the only ones who got anything from the firm.
Is Orrick really in that bad shape? Now I'm scared. (And no, I am not at Orrick.)
I stumbled onto this site earlier today and was amazed at the amount of negative/fearful posts. I jumped ship from the big firm and started my own a number of years ago. I am also currently hiring. So, I wanted to see what job market the 3Ls I am interviewing next week are currently facing.
I would advise those who are out of a job not to expect a huge salary to be handed to you. You may consider working at a smaller firm, a non-profit, or even going out on your own. True, you won't make as much money as working at the large firm, but you will have a better life.
60 did not mention an eclairs; rather, an "eu claire." I am pretty sure that's in Wisconsin. If they are devouring entire cities, Orrick partners are scarier than anyone could have imagined.
Maybe Kramer is the curse. He was at Brobeck went it started foundering as well, ya?
Tell Bess I'm boycotting her site until that grape-feeding ad disappears.
dung > partners
Mystttal (the commenter) : i love your profile picture, will you be my fb friend?
*1) posts resume on mystal's wall 2) ??? 3) profit!*
-nervous T-10 1L
soon to be nervous 1L sa
how come no article about McDermott delaying start dates?
No, it was an eu claire -- it was an eclaire with a frech fry on top, which is known as a eu claire where I'm from.
#76, I'm sure that gorging on a baked good is a lot more fun than interviewing somebody on campus. But the behavior was unusually rude and inappropriate. I know people like to make snarky little comments on the internet -- probably because they think they are being witty (I'm guilty of it too), when in reality they aren't. I'm trying to be deadly serious though. The behavior I saw from the partner that this firm chose to send to Harvard to interview prospective associates -- the leverage on which partners' profits are highly dependent upon -- was so remarkably odd that I am not suprised that the firm has no tact in dealing with young people that it has made apparent committments to. These are the little things that people are going to have to start paying attention to in the future so as to ensure that poorly run firms that can't compete in tough times skate through fat and happy during the good times.
89 -- You have a missing em-dash. Also, "deadly" should probably be "dead," unless you are also missing a comma between "deadly" and "serious." But then you'd have an orphan "though" at the end of the sentence. I believe you are missing a "do not" in the final sentence. Unless you are suggesting that there is some idiosyncratic group of would-be recruits with an affinity for "remarkably odd" partners.
Where I'm from, and eau claire is the first refill of a bong.
Hey 90, will you edit my thesis? Superrrrrrrrr!
Hey, maybe you haven't been keeping up on current events, but we just got our asses kicked, pal!
89 - a bit full of yourself; 90 - you have a typo too ("and" eau claire)
no more student loans
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=46657437878
89, 60-- Where is the douche patrol when we need them? Seriously. "On paper I was a "top candidate""? So you're judging a firm because one representative decided to avoid your ugly @$$ and satisfy her munchies instead? I'm sure she had spent all day poring over your fine resume, and it's a shame she couldn't recognize your greatness. Seriously ridiculous. I believe from the details you provided that you actually were one of my classmates. Thanks for making those three years at HLS suck!
I miss Jack Bauer. Where'd he go?
56-
i've heard about white & case round 2 as well. anyone have solid info?
Pillsbury did the October/November/January start date thing and still fired 11 out of 24 first years in New York. Any 3Ls with offers in non-litigation groups should be worried. If a firm offers a nonprofit route, take it!
95 - S/he is being douchey in qualifying the story by talking about how "high quality" he or she is. Yet, the behavior of the recruiting attorney appearing at OCI - as 60 describes it - was pretty rude and dismissive. I'm assuming that said recruiting attorney SAW 60 stand up and extend a hand, but instead turned her gaze away quickly without so much as an "Excuse me" or some sort of pre-eclair pounce acknowledgement.
That 60 is some HLS badass with excellent grades and blah, blah, blah is incidental to the story. Perhaps 60 would excuse that same behavior in that same recruiting attorney if she had acted that way towards someone "lesser" than him/her self. I don't know.
That this recruiting attorney seemed to have zero social skills is the pertinent part of the story, I think. To me, it actually DOES say a lot that this firm didn't think much of sending a social mess to OCI.
100 Punks
Sheriff Bart
89, 60 sounds like he/she stands in front of a mirror all day saying: "I'm a top candidate, I'm a top candidate, I'm a top candidate." You and your ego should get a room. Got to love your thinking: one person grabbing a pastry instead of shaking your hand = firm is TTT.
As a federal law clerk making substantially less than $75k, my thought regarding this new option is that these 3Ls are being given an amazing opportunity -- $75k to travel the world and do something good for mankind, on the tab of a Biglaw firm. And this is a BAD thing??
Before the tank of the economy, Biglaw firms (Skadden, Fried Frank, etc.) offered these fellowships for a select few, and they were greatly sought after. I know, I've been applying for them. Now that the option is becoming broadly available, why isn't this viewed as an awesome opportunity to do something GOOD with your first year out of law school, keeping the promise of your (coveted?) 100 hour weeks and six figure salary in your back pocket? I simply don't understand the huge problem with this. Personally, I'm glad Orrick is requiring some kind of service work for the $$; getting paid $75k to play video games and start your own melancholy blog is part of the root of the problem with our society today. I'm also willing to bet that there is a lot of flexibility associated with the strings attached to the money; i.e. the ability to create your own fellowship, on your own terms! Wow.
The exponential effect of all the good that could be done by these well educated, financially supported first years has the potential to be pretty far-reaching, in so many ways. Could we all take a deep breath and please get some perspective? So many of my friends who went straight from law school to the hell of Biglaw tell me again and again how they wished they'd had more time to consider what they really wanted. Well, thanks to a vulnerable economy, here's your chance, compensation included, job offer extended. Remind me why this is something we're crying about please.
102 - I'll trade my Orrick offer for your federal clerkship. How's that for a deal?
Private Hudson rules.
"Remind me why this is something we're crying about please."
The problems are:
1. I don't think they're that confident a job will be there when they come back.
2. Given that we're in March, I'm not sure how realistic it is for them to find something else to do with the year right now (especially in this economy). Sure, they could still strike out on their own, travel the world, blog, etc., but that leaves a gap on your resume. If you go into an interview a couple years from now, you don't want to explain that that's what you've been doing since graduating from law school.
The Harvard student bawling about the Orrick partner grabbing an eclair in his/her magnificent presence will be lucky to be serving that partner an eclair if they show-up for interviews next fall. The law firm sector of the economy has been "overbought" for years with a cost structure that made no sense even in the boom times; this is but the first wave of layoffs that will eventually catch many other associates, non-equity partners and partners without significant books of business. Mark my words; a law firm is like a human body; the trunk (i.e., capital partners with business) will cut off nourishment to the arms and legs (associates, nonequity partners) to save the body.. It will not be easy for young associates who have been laid off to replicate their "old" jobs; except for those having bankruptcy experience, very few law firms will be hiring anyone at $160K or more who has been laid off. Additionally, many potential employers will be put-off by such a salary history because they KNOW that the associate lawyer who made $160k will be discontented making $ 70 K or less than half that.
The Harvard student bawling about the Orrick partner grabbing an eclair in his/her magnificent presence will be lucky to be serving that partner an eclair if they show-up for interviews next fall. The law firm sector of the economy has been "overbought" for years with a cost structure that made no sense even in the boom times; this is but the first wave of layoffs that will eventually catch many other associates, non-equity partners and partners without significant books of business. Mark my words; a law firm is like a human body; the trunk (i.e., capital partners with business) will cut off nourishment to the arms and legs (associates, nonequity partners) to save the body.. It will not be easy for young associates who have been laid off to replicate their "old" jobs; except for those having bankruptcy experience, very few law firms will be hiring anyone at $160K or more who has been laid off. Additionally, many potential employers will be put-off by such a salary history because they KNOW that the associate lawyer who made $160k will be discontented making $ 70 K or less than half that.
Dear Orick friend,
My name Roger Lou and I am 3 year at number ones law school in U.S. and A. beside Harvard called Americas University Washington College of Law. I sorry you losing job. You know, I finding job at number ones best law companies like Wachtell and Sutherland. Dearest comrade to Roger called Hostra Magnon tell Roger PPP was 10 million dollar (28 millions yuans). Mr. Orrick bad for doing the lay down hardworker fellow law student and people, very like Shinyoung Ho that Mr. Hasting firm did. Other friend tell me that no Americas University or UPenn State (numbers 78 in U.S. and A.) student and lawyer being lay down by Orick or Mr. Hasting or firms. Maybe lucky we.
With Respect.
Roger Lou (话/北方)
105 is spot-on.
105. "The problems are:
1. I don't think they're that confident a job will be there when they come back."
You deserve a gold star. I have seen this before from 1980-1990. When I graduated with my degree, the entire industry was collapsing. The general advice at the time was that this was temporary and the market would come back. So, I went for an MS. Two years and what seemed a fortune later, the situation was pretty much the same. After scrapping and scraping at technician jobs, I gave up and went into a different field, law. It took almost 15 years after graduating for the jobs in my first field to come back.
My heart goes out to all the law students, who may never have a chance at the dream.
Job Losses Hint at Vast Remaking of Economy
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/business/economy/07jobs.html
107 - Agreed that a high salary history is typically a turn-off to potential employers. It's assumed that someone accepting a job for much less than they were once paid will fly that coop ASAP. It takes a lot of strength of personality to convince a potential employer you really mean it.
But on the HSL student. OK, OK. S/he led off that story badly. My lowly self read the credential list in the beginning of that story as merely saying "If they treated a top candidate this way, imagine how they are when you work for them."
It is REALISTIC to assume that recruiting lawyers lie their asses off to the top 5% of graduates from a place like HSL. That's 'cuz, they do. They're friggin' snake oil salesmen to such candidates.
But, c'mon people. Show a little self-awareness here, will you? Had 60/HSL student NOT listed the typically attractive credentials in the beginning of the story, you all damn well know that many of you would have concluded that s/he "deserved" the rude, dismissive treatment because s/he "MUST" be in a third tier school or whatnot.
The reason that conclusion would have been drawn? 60's description of the rdue/dismissive treatment. Self-referential and circular as that reasoning may be.
But can we focus on the essential part of the story here? This recruiting lawyer did not acknowledge the presence of the candidates either before or immediately after the eclair grab. Common social courtesy, informed by the reason she's there in the first place, would have dictated that she at least ACKNOWLEDGE the candidate's presence.
Instead, she decided to play an insecure power game of chicken, reinforcing her whim option to a candidate.
At the very least, the partner is either an insecure asshole who likes head games or WELL inexperienced in the art of the deal.
Neither possibility speaks well of the firm. Because if either is the case, why the fuck is she a partner?
107 and 111 -
People leave large law firms for lower paying lawyer jobs in the government or in-house counsel positions all the time. I think there is an understanding that people trade lower salaries for a better quality of life.
My guess is that the biggest hurdle these people will face is the "were you fired for performance" question. Even if they can truthfully answer no I think many interviewers will be wary.
112 - (111 here) Yes, no doubt. That's what makes a "stealth" layoff such a particularly douchebag move, especially in any firm who was willing to say that STAFF layoffs were economic.
However, what passes as "low performance" in BigLaw is also deemed suspect by many other employers. The clients of BigLaw will not admit that those law firms have questionable standards to begin with. But smaller law firm competitors all KNOW the standards are arbitrary.
So, will Simpson take a "performance based" lay off from Skadden or vice versa? Most likely not.
Will a competitive geared smaller law firm accept such a person? Only if that candidate can convince those making hiring decisions that his narrow field of vision is no longer. The "performance based" termination will take a secondary consideration.
In times like these, with headlines of slashed PPP all over the place, having to say you were "fired" by BigLaw can sound like having to live in the film industry having to say you were fired by Scott Rudin.
Who ISN'T fired by Scott Rudin?
yes! Roger Lou is back! i love that guy.
Congratulations 3Ls! You just dodged a bullet. Take that money and run.
As a now former Orrick associate, I have been thinking of quitting for years. I feel sorry for those that are left behind after this layoff. The talent model will only result in even lower salaries. And the firm itself may collapse due to its inability to land any new work and the loss of several huge clients.
If you are a minority, I strongly encourage you to avoid Orrick. Most of the partners only give a crap about the associates that remind them of themselves or their children (mainly rich and white), which is why this layoff, like the one in November, disproportionately impacted diverse associates.
And Ralph Baxter is delusional. Orrick never has been and never will be Cravath, so he should probably stop comparing the two. Maybe it was a pleasant place to work in years past, but now all of the associates are miserable and forced to kiss as much ass as possible to survive.
115: Spot on! I survived Tuesday's employment holocaust at Orrick. And I find myself feeling a bit disappointed to still be here now in the aftermath. This place is miserable, everyone knows it. How many associates and partners not named KJ-M and Kramer would bail at the first decent opportunity? My guess is nearly all of us if the opportunity ever presented itself. We're waiting. No one is really working. How sustainable is this thing? It isn't.
Like most nasty Biglaw partners, Ralph Baxter is a Democrat. http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/ralph-baxter.asp?cycle=08
I always find it ironic that all these people that "believe" in standing up for the "little guy" are incredibly nasty people to deal with and most conservative Republicans are very nice and polite people.
102 - formal federal law clerk/biglaw associate here. You're spot on.
102 - formal federal law clerk/biglaw associate here. You're spot on.
"most conservative Republicans are very nice and polite people"
For the record, "polite" is not the same as "decent human being."
Just sayin'.
That said, I don't think either party has a monopoly on being polite, or on being decent. I tried very hard not to roll my eyes at your comment, 117. It was hard work.
29, et al., Jones Day is now the top California firm. Five offices, all busy, no layoffs, above market salary (above non-frozen market). No brainer.
121 - Jones Day's PPP is 750K. Horrifically TTT
120=nasty liberal Democrat.
117 - Proud founder of his school's Federalist Society.
How much will the law firm pay for me not to apply there...perhaps $20?
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE CONFIRM THE CRAVATH START DATES?
111 sounds like 60 trying to defend himself or herself. Not saying you are. Just that you sound like it.
You ignore one of the big fallacies of 60's post. That you can judge the worth of an entire firm from 1 person's actions in the lounge of a pre-screening event. The "snub" did not seem like a big deal anyway. And your comment on "why" the person is a partner because of your 2 second read of the person. Grow up. Business is not one huge love fest where people must coddle trumped up preschoolers (by which I mean "top candidates" from Harvard who's ego outshines the sun) in order to be worthy of partnership.
A person's book of business is much more important to almost all firms than your notion of common courtesy. Just like a law professor's publications are much more important to a typical law school than his/her ability to teach.
127 - 111 here. Getting business ISN'T about "being loved". It's about making a great first impression because you never get a chance to make another one.
Recruiting lawyer in this story showed piss poor social skills if it was the case that she SAW 60 (and other candidates if present) and pulled a distraction/whim power game.
That's the kind of thing that can blow a firm's image with a CLIENT too. And it's not the kind of piss poor social skill that gets turned off and on like a switch. Because if you have that low level of skill in areas in which you are supposed to be making an impression, then the falsity of the "on" mode is quite apparent to anyone you deem as "counting" too.
You don't GET a "book of business" with piss poor social skills.
111 again for a PS.
Incidentally, what is it I'm supposedly "defending" myself from?
Hi! Imagine you're a 3L who was planning on starting at Orrick in the fall. Now you're in the group starting in late March. You go to HYS or have really good grades at CCN.
What do you do? TYIA.
Use the time to reflect on the fact that foreigners are displacing homegrown U.S. lawyers (and U.S. law graduates) WITHIN the United States legal market as a result of the United States' liberal immigration policies. (I'm not even talking about the outsourcing phenomenon here.)
There is no shortage of lawyers from the United States. There wasn't a shortage before the recession--when even grads from solid, if not T10 schools, found it challenging to break into BigLaw--and there sure isn't a shortage now.
My guess is that foreigners make up at least 10% of the associate and counsel ranks in major metropolitan areas in the United States. What is the magnitude of the BigLaw contraction? Ten to fifteen percent. Are most foreign lawyers really contributing something that special that another hardworking American lawyer or law grad couldn't? Does a grad from a Loyola, a Cardozo, a Pepperdine, a Boalt, or pick almost any decent ABA school really not cut it? Don't we hear all the time that attorneys are fungible?
These jobs should be reserved for U.S. citizens. And yet, with the worst economic downturn in a generation, the United States continues to hand out work visas (under the H-1B quota and under the JD and LLM degree feeder system) to--or turn a blind eye to--foreigners that come here to compete against U.S. citizens for law firm jobs.
Some info on the H-1B visa program:
The Department of Labor states that the H-1B law doesn't require employers to seek local talent before recruiting abroad for their US job openings, except in limited circumstances when the employer is considered H-1B dependent:
The DOL's Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2006-2011 (pg. 35) states: "... H-1B workers may be hired even when a qualified U.S. worker wants the job, and a U.S. worker can be displaced from the job in favor of the foreign worker."
The Federal Register, dated June 30, 2006, Section II, paragraph 4, "the statute does not require employers...to demonstrate that there are no available US workers or to test the labor market for US workers as required under the permanent labor certification program."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H1B_visa
131 -- right on, how come these foreigners take up all the choice spots in the US firms, but there are no Americans working in London, Moscow or Hong Kong!!! h1 is a joke.
Oh, one more thing 131, there are enough american made cars sitting around right now that if the gov't was serious about fixing this economic mess, they would just ban foreign cars for the time being, until all the american cars got sold. That would fix GM and Chrysler right away. You with me on that, right brotha!
USA USA USA
Does anyone know the number of foreign lawyers working legally (and illegally) in the United States? Does the ABA keep track of this?
It would be interesting if it exceeded the number of layoffs.
133,
By laying off foreign lawyers first (and ending the H-1B program and JD/LLM funnel systems), we would be helping homegrown lawyers and supporting the soon-to-be American JDs whose job prospects have dimmed.
These foreign lawyers aren't, for the most part, doing anything an American lawyer couldn't do. And they have a whole other legal market (their own country) and support network (immediate or extended family, friends) to absorb them.
It is outrageous that they are given priority over Americans.
131/135 = idiot
136 = evidence foreign lawyers don't make much of a contribution
133,
By banning foreign cars first, we would be helping homegrown autoworkers and supporting the soon-to-be American autoworkers in training whose job prospects have dimmed.
These foreign carmakers aren't, for the most part, doing anything an American carmaker couldn't do. And they have a whole other car market (their own country) and support network (immediate or extended family, friends) to absorb them.
It is outrageous that they are given priority over Americans.
None of this is helpful.
It's only logical that the United States should give priority to its own citizens over an influx of foreign lawyers who have another country they can work in already.
130 - you should probably go back in time and accept one of your v10 offers. Good luck with that.
It's only logical that the United States should give priority to its own carmakers over an influx of foreign carmakers who have another country they can sell in already.
Dear 135/140,
I am happy to inform you that the UK will be banning US lawyers from practicing in our country. It's only logical that the United Kingdom should give priority to its own citizens over an influx of foreign lawyers who have another country they can work in already. There is nothing a US lawyer does that a UK-trained lawyer can't do.
Good luck competing with 2000 extra experienced US attorneys fleeing the UK. Since you can't even get a job competing against the worst of the foreign lawyers, you'll need that.
Sincerely,
UK lawyer
What an arrogant position to take towards nonprofit and government work. Are these unpaid positions? Hope so, 'cause the recession has put a crimp in everybody's budget, not just PPP.
And does Orrick really think nonprofits are dying to bring people aboard who have shown no interest in their mission? There are already enough dedicated people to make finding a nonprofit or government position plenty competitive.
128 stands in front of a mirror before participating in his/her law school's on campus recruiting event repeating "I'm the client, I'm the client, I'm the client."
While I don't agree that we should ban foreign attorneys, I do think it is highly unfair that American lawyers have to go to law school and incur six figure debt to take the NY Bar, while many Europeans and Australians just major in law as undergraduates and are allowed to take the Bar.
The NY Bar should require an LLM at the very least or alternatively eliminate the law school pre-requisite on American lawyers educated in this country.
I'm just laughing right now! When the post re Orrick's bonuses went up, so many Orrick employees were in denial. I said that Orrick was a sinking ship and that it was firing tons of minority attorneys. People responded with "Sinking ship? Not my office!" or claimed that we were just bitter. I want to take this opportunity to say "In yo face!" to all the Kool-Aid drinkers. As for 3Ls with Orrick offers (or any other employee there for that matter), look for something else. In this economy, it may seem like a March 2010 start date is better than no start date. But, I really don't think this firm will be around much longer. You may start working there and earn a pay check or two, but they will make your life a living hell and they will fire you anyway. Sorry to be so doom and gloom! Protect yourselves!
So let me get this straight. If I accept the $18,500 in f*ck you money from Orrick, will I get to keep the $15,000 bar stipend? Have the bar "stipend" checks gone out to 3Ls yet? How much in taxes will be withheld from the $18,500 or the $15,000? I want to know how much I am getting scammed.
Quick comment for historical context.
Shortly before Brobeck's implosion was complete, it offered the graduating class of incoming associates two options - a $30k buyout, and delayed start date. (Starting to sound familiar?)
The people who took the buyout found other jobs and had a $30k nest egg to start with. The people who didn't ended up waiting for a start date that never came. I'm just sayin'.
-- Class of '02
yes 149 but how likely is a 3L to get another job in this economy??
Our Lakota nonprofit is offering Orrick people public interest litigator positions (unpaid) to telecommute from your location; litigate against 7th Worst Company in the World mining uranium in Indian Country; protect the sacred Black Hills from toxic uranium mining in the aquifers;
gain valuable experience in a growing field of federal adm nuclear regulatory licensing litigation - research, briefing, motions, evidentiary practice, appellate, oral arguments, cowboys, Indians, buffalo, horses and sweat lodges -
A few trips per year to Indian Country - see www.savecrowbutte.org - arm.legal@gmail.com -
Has anyone heard anything about ex-Orrick employees suing Orrick. So many laid off were minorities. Or am I the only one who noticed that?
Join the Army JAG Corps. That is a worthy public service. Army JAG Corps will provide you with a choice assignments like deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan where your military pay will be tax free! If you happen to have a father or mother who is a general officer or a nationally known politician, you can stay in Washington DC. Being a good ass kisser helps.
COL David Diner
Join the Army JAG Corps. That is a worthy public service. Army JAG Corps will provide you with a choice assignments like deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan where your military pay will be tax free! If you happen to have a father or mother who is a general officer or a nationally known politician, you can stay in Washington DC. Being a good ass kisser helps.
COL David Diner
Join the Army JAG Corps. That is a worthy public service. Army JAG Corps will provide you with a choice assignments like deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan where your military pay will be tax free! If you happen to have a father or mother who is a general officer or a nationally known politician, you can stay in Washington DC. Being a good ass kisser helps.
COL David Diner