I prefer Boca Vista Phase 3.

awesome ideas are come from me

better than 3 months severance...

I think what they meant by a small fortune is a Skadden associate's normal salary.

but it still royally sucks for incoming first-years. Should any incoming first-year take it? Or should we just hope that enough associates take it?

This would never happen at Locke Lord.

Comment removed by moderator.

I'm confused - how are you getting from $80K to $50K?

Comment removed by moderator.

"they promises"
I promises you that I cant understand the grammatical errors unless it is to hopefully create comments and drive page views....

It probably ain't the first years who are taking it. The profiled individual was a few years out. In a normal economy, many people like that leave anyway to have a life, realizing that the work sucks despite the pay. So $80,000 is a great deal - if they did the same thing a year ago the pay would be $0 and there wouldn't be a job to come back to.

Is I are a gay?

Will they pay me 10k to defer my summer associate position for a year?

Skadden 2L

@2 That's Del Boca Vista

@14 - True that.

Nice South Park reference big guy. You are alright.

Skadden is a firm with sharp management. They have come to the realization that so many other firms have: that the 2009 and 2010 law school classes are two of the weakest this country has seen since the Carter administration. Kudos to Skadden and other top firms for figuring out a way to minimize the damage that the '09s can have on their financial statements and prestige. One would expect that '10s are next.

@8: It's one-third of your base salary.

160 / 3 = 53k (1st year)

The associate in the article was a 5th year. 240 / 3 = 80k

"...to not work in Biglaw is dream job."

I think you mean "is a dream job."

Do you proofread before posting or are you just an idiot?

My prestige is humongous.

Major Applewhite.

Do they pay a bonus for a two year NAMBLA clerkship?

hang on to

@ 10 - iss promises, preciousssss.

Is it bad that people at the mall make whale sounds at my wife when we are walking through?

Major Applewhite

I've got prestige in my pants.

@21 -- There is no such thing.

Elie - this is one of the worst articles that you have written. It misstates facts (e.g., the salary is greater than $50k) and lacks any analysis.

Heavens to Betsy!

"Friday was the last days for associates to enroll"

Sigh.

Horrible article Elie....and yes, being paid $80K to NOT WORK is a small fortune.

I am very pleased with my decision to accept at Munger rather than this shitshow circus.

I will be spending a few days this week in Paducah, Kentucky for a document review. Can anyone recommend a good dry cleaners there? I tend to be a messy eater and just want to plan ahead. Thanks in advance!

nice underpants gnome reference elie, why havent you covered the layoffs at dla - austin

What about the layoffs at Locke Lord Housto & Austin?

27, the post notes that the 50k is a roughly a third of a first-year's salary. Which it is. The program allows associates to take a year off for a third of the salary. So, 50k for a first year. Higher for more senior associates.

Clerking at NAMBLA is not nearly as prestigious as it used to be.

wilmerhale pushed back start dates. Where's the story ATL?

wilmerhale pushed back start dates. Where's the story ATL?

Good grief. Yet more fear mongering by Elie. Quit picking apart the program as a "mercy killing" and just look at it for what it is: an optional sabbatical to hold over associates when times are lean for the firm.

I am not ashamed of the size of my Skadden.

I think Skadden is just sending the 125 who helped arrange this financial crisis overseas to avoid prosecution here in the US.

Skadden to 25 years to life.

confirm that wilmerhale just pushed back start dates. firm says that it won't impact summer program dates.

This is a made up story.

Mass opiates on a Monday.

Underpants gnomes reference.... fantastic work, Elie.

This is some terrible, one-dimensional analysis. Are you sure you graduated from Harvard?

@36 While clerking at NAMBLA no longer guarantees one a job in BigLaw, the perks are still excellent. I would encourage all people who are looking to do some sort of Public Interest to look into NAMBLA.

I would appreciate a South Park road warrior reference once in a while.

captain delicious

Skadden also lets you pound your secretary in the ass in exchange for less pay. I have noticed a lot of associates around here taking this option.

wilmerhale true. sigh.

When the phonics monkey is worked in... then I will be impressed. Until then I will just sit back with slight admiration.

Considering $80k would have put you in the top 15% of personal incomes (and top 25% of household incomes) BEFORE the downturn, I think it's fair to call that a small fortune from most people's point of view.

Perhaps it won't go as far in Manhattan, but it still puts you at about 29k above the NY metro area median income.

I just picked a Skadden off my NAMBLA.

45 -- I actually think Elie's analysis is right on. Skadden is probably anticipating that a singificant percentage of these people will not come back after a year, and if this turns out wrong, it'll be a dicey situation when they all try to return to the firm.

Sorry about the typos on this one. I published the wrong version. My bad.
--Elie

You nailed it this time, Elie. Skadden clearly is a step ahead of other firms in its forward thinking.

I don't get it. Does Skadden represent NAMBLA or something?

MysTTTal, you stupid fuck, $80,000 for a year of staying home is a small fortune. Most Americans don't dream of $80,000. Yes, we went to top law schools and make top dollar, but guess what, shit for brains, that does not mean that the vast majority did not. So, why not try to pretend you are in touch with the America that most of our parents came from, you dirt bag.

I feel bad for the CWT NY 05 female associates.

Teehee 57. Your misplaced hostility is amusing. Thank you!

54 - so you admit that ON THIS ONE (wink, wink) there are typos, but then excuse it by saying you committed the bigger blunder of publishing the "wrong version."

That's a new one. Well done!

57, there is nothing good about you or Texas.

thank you for playing

Shop smart!
Shop S-MART!

ya, the good old new york times. sometimes brilliant, sometimes downright stupid

Congratulations on taking the bait. The NYT ran an article that was obviously written so that ATL and countless other legal blogs would link to it. And sure enough it happened!

WH start dates pushed back to January and March with a voluntary deferral until fall 2010 for 75K... where's the story on that?

Is this true?

57 = douche

57; idiot

57....giant douche or turd sandwich?

Duckasslobster

Elie, how about some analysis on why other top firms that are facing the same problems as Skadden both publicly (Weil, Latham) and privately (Simpson, Cravath) aren't offering a similar program? Why is that incoming first years are seen as the way to combat the lack of attrition and work problems when you have hundreds of associates at the firms right now who would probably love to take a similar "deferral"?

57--a fortune in real life, not websters, is defined by what you have to give to get it. MOST americans don't do what we have to to make a living. they didn't go almost 200 grand in debt and give their lives to study and then the firm to make the salaries that we make. and if the firm is going to show "generosity", which, AS COMPARED TO OTHER FIRMS WHICH TYPICALLY ARE REALLY CHEAP AS HELL, and give a third of the salary essentially as severance (because let's be real here, who's going back voluntarily? and if you want to, do you really believe the story won't have changed by then? if you do, you are very very naive), then it was EARNED. shut your fucking trap.

i'm 72 and that was "which, as compared ..... Skadden is showing,

I am better than all of you. You are all IDIOTS.

Major Applewhite.

i'm 72 and that was "which, as compared ..... Skadden is showing,

Only in Big Law would lawyers get an $80,000 one-year paid vacation. I don't suppose they are offering the same deal to the staff.

Who knew that Skadden hired the underpants gnomes to run their recruiting team?

This mid-level deferral plan is BRILLIANT! Thank you thank you skadden management for saving our biglaw careers!

-incoming associate

This has firms which decided to kick off their cost cutting by laying off first years looking pretty foolish.

Re: the snotty remark about accepting $50K at the end of the article

$50K is more than the income of the median American family of four. It's one thing to be snarky, ATL, but don't be snooty. Remember, greed is what got us into this mess.

This is a novel development at a huge, prestigious firm, and the commenters as a group spend half their time on Elie's admittedly annoying typos and errors. Get over it folks. He'll get better or he won't. He'll get fired or he won't.

Anyway, I think the substance of Elie's point is correct. This is a year's severance, and despite the promises, those taking the deals should not expect to return.

I'm not offended by the $80k no-work policy so much as her condescending travel the world/ "teach Englich to dem poor furinners" farce. That was just drummed up to placate the liberal NY Times drones. We all know she's really going to spend the year going through a 1000-DVD Netflix queue while stuffing $80k worth of bon bons into her face.

Agree with 71.

I would honestly give someone my kidney if they will pay off my student loans. I have a major case of 3Litis.

5 years ago, this Top 20 LS degree would have virtually guaranteed me an upper-middle class lifestyle. I wanted to buy a well-insulated condo when this was all done. Now, I am going to have to keep renting. Keep fucking renting with that fat dumb bitch stomping around above me. She drives me fucking crazy stomping around all day and all night and now I have no money to make it stop.

We want to hear more about the situation at WilmerHale.

Is this story a joke? Teaching english to buddist monks in sri lanka? Installing solar panels in tibet? Is she writing a college application essay?

The most appalling thing is that once again the world has to listen to over paid corporate lawyers pretending that they have a conscience by doing something altruistic on the side, when they are not filling their bank accounts. If she (and the rest of you) cared so much about making a difference in the world, she could have taken a job in public interest six years ago instead of cashing in. Nothing wrong with cashing in, but stop pretending you care.

If average Americans want to make a small fortune like Skadden associates they should just go to law school like we did. If it's so easy, why not just do it?

80=communist

86: You sound angry. Are you angry?

When is the next nationwide start-date roundup? Nothing else matters right now.

80 -- For a a full-time lawyer, who has a potentially lucrative career ahead and is currently making, at least, $160,000 plus a nice bonus, accepting Skadden's bizarre offer is far more risky than the NY Times article would have it. Despite its cavalier attitude towards the situation faced by the driven, highly-educated, and probably debt-burdened young lawyers, who are being asked to put their careers on hold for a year (the title "Sidebar" is offensive and flippant, IMO), this isn't a fun choice to be tackled playfully while sitting at the dining room table with a stack of travel books, dreaming about brinigng green-collar jobs to the Far East, with a little fun in the sun mixed in.

Certainly, I'd rather be side-barred at Skadden than laid off at GM, but I don't think the comparison between a lawyer, who reasonably expected to make a high six-figure salary in a competitive, grueling profession at a top, top firm, and an average industrial worker is apt in any way, especially with respect to compensation.

Kudos to Skadden's marketing/HR/PR people. This article is a coup.

Agree with 80.

And speaking of 80, yes, Virginia, most Americans would consider a salary of 80k a small fortune.

Love the underwear gnome reference, Elie. One of my favorites.

"The argument against unions--that they unduly burden employers with unreasonable demands--is one that corporate America makes in good times and bad. . . . There is a strong argument that the slack labor market of a recession actually makes unions all the more important. Without a united front, workers will have even less bargaining power in the recession than they had during the growth years of this decade, when they largely failed to get raises even as productivity and profits soared. If pay continues to lag, it will only prolong the downturn by inhibiting spending."--editorial, New York Times, Dec. 28, 2008

"In a striking example of corporate hardball, the New York Times Co. has threatened to shut down one of its journalistic jewels, the Boston Globe, unless the New England paper's unions agree to sweeping concessions."--Washington Post, April 4, 2009

Cooley may be the only one trumping Skadden in deferral compensation: $25k (bar expenses included) mandatory deferral to January and $60k for year long deferral. $85k, beat that Skadden!

The comments on the NYT article are hilarious. Man, people are really pissed off at lawyers. There's one commenter there - her handle is Library Lady or something like that - who is LIVID about this situation. She works hard! Making less than $80k! And she went to graduate school! I kind of want to punch her in the neck.

But the teaching English to monks and installing solar panels in wherever...all I could think about was "I have a Masters in Russian literature, a PhD in biochemistry, and for the last 18 months, I've been de-worming orphans in Somalia."

"Evidently, one-third of a Biglaw salary to not work in Biglaw is a dream job."

Evidently you thought so, Elie. Wait... please tell me that Lat isn't actually paying you that much. "I published the wrong version"???? THIS IS YOUR JOB, dumbass.

A small fortune? Only the New York Times' incongruous desire to appeal to "average Americans" would make it characterize a little more than $50,000 (a third of a first year associate salary) as a "small fortune."

That comment disgusts me, but enough people have already pointed that out. Most people don't make $80,000 showing up to work every day.

As for 86, you are an idiot. Corporate law isn't some "fork in the road" from which one can never turn back. People can be corporate lawyers and take a year off to do something good for the world. Would you be less angry if she sat in her parent's basement eating cheetos? Again, you're an idiot.

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
Those who take the option should spend the paid time training for another profession.
That Skadden associate sounds very silly.

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
Those who take the option should spend the paid time training for another profession.
That Skadden associate sounds very silly.

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
Those who take the option should spend the paid time training for another profession.
That Skadden associate sounds very silly.

Is Skadden thinning the herd?

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
That one associate seems silly.
If I were her, I would be quietly training for another profession over the next year. but I'm not a dimwit who thinks that there will be a job at Skadden for those folks.
True. The Times said there would be positions. The Times will not mention the lack of them this time next year.

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
That one associate seems silly.
If I were her, I would be quietly training for another profession over the next year. but I'm not a dimwit who thinks that there will be a job at Skadden for those folks.
True. The Times said there would be positions. The Times will not mention the lack of them this time next year.

Skadden is thinning the herd.
The NY Times is helping them spin it.
That one associate seems silly.
If I were her, I would be quietly training for another profession over the next year. but I'm not a dimwit who thinks that there will be a job at Skadden for those folks.
True. The Times said there would be positions. The Times will not mention the lack of them this time next year.

86: doing well is not mutually exclusive with doing good. Moreover, choosing "big law" for a few years in your mid-20s does not automatically preclude you from ever doing anything else. Try thinking before you speak - and maybe try not being so angry.

Obviously, Skadden associates have a thing or two to learn about propriety. There were two of them complaining in full voice about the sidebar program on the 2 train this morning. They kept looking around to see if they knew anyone. They had no idea that the person standing in front of them knew that the id she pulled out of her LV handbag was from SASM&F.

High salaries do not insure common sense. I got tired of hearing them complain and was happy that the train drowned out their incessant complaining.

Maybe one of their friends will see this post and remind them to only discuss the weather on the train.

Second 16.

The author of this article is completely out-of-touch with reality. The fact that she believes that an $80,000 (or even $60,000) stipend is not a "small fortune" is absolutely disgusting. I have a friend who graduated magna cum laude from Georgetown about 10 years ago, but still makes less than $80,000 since she's in journalism... Idiot, not every intelligent person goes into law; it's the insecure kids who need society's approval who do.

@107 - Acela Bob strikes again!

Even $50,000 is more than most government or non-profit lawyers make right out of law school. Does everyone in the world of Biglaw have as warped a perspective as this ATL writer?

98, your name calling demonstrates that you are clearly not a litigator. You must be a corporate associate who has sold out, and is really proud of the pro bono work you do.

I am not angry. I just can't stand hypocrites. LIke i said, if you people cared so much, you would have taken a job making a difference, instead of making a buck.

109 -- To me and every other reasonable person, considering the dictionary definition of a fortune as "riches, wealth" or "a very large sum of money," a small one is an amount I could retire on and still live reasonably well. No one, anywhere in this country can retire on $50,000, $60,000 or even double and triple those numbers.

Phase II: She traveled to Berlin and jumped her fat ass into the polar bear enclosure. Free dessert provided only by Skadden

113 and the rest of you entitled monkeys: Try getting your head out of your long island upbringing. It's 50-80k severance. That is a small fortune, unless you grew up rich. You people who say no are idiots and deserve to end up at a TTT like Morgan Lewis.

I was one of those "economically" fired by Paul Hastings and life is tough . Skadden looks humane from here.

what about the staff at skadden? they just get the boot and the protected class (associates) get time off with pay until the economy recovers.

you lawyers are vermin, scum, selfish, heartless piles of monkey shit.

115 -- You and others keep reiterating that 50k is a small fortune, without any basis for the statement. That amount is about a year's salary for an average person. Since when is that a fortune of any size???

Considering that most of the Skadden sidebar people are going to be functionally unemployed for a year (at least), I'd say that doubly reinforces my point, as they're going to need the money to pay rent and eat. That's not the situation of an overly entitled rich person, but an over-educated, under-employed person entering what is almost certainly a nerve-racking and unanticipated turn in his/her career. Your jealously of the formerly successful is really transparent and very peculiar given that most of the Skadden sidebar participants are probably less than pleased about their circumstances.

111, a friend of mine was offered a job editing one of ATL's sister blogs. Trust me, this is not Elie's real perspective on life.

I agree with you 111. $50,000 is a pretty large sum of money by most standards. $50,000 is even more considering you can choose to do absolutely nothing for a year. I think the associates choosing Sidebar are going to be just fine.

If the staff wants the perks and protection that associates get they should just go to law school and become associates.

ATL has gone elitist. Ugly stuff. $50K is chump change. Yeah.

Why the FUCK couldn't LaTTTham do this?

This is to all of the people who continue to compare Law firm salaries with "median household income" of different areas. We are attorney's, not regular old workforce people who maybe have a college degree. In addition, if you look at our salaries...then remove the MASSIVE student loan nut from our budget each month, you will realize that your 9-5 marketing assistant job amasses you a better fortune than we have right now.

Let's do the math...A first year graduate from a law school (and by that I mean T14) probably has a student loan payment each month of about 2,000 on average (if you went for a super extended payment plan it may be less) now, take that 53,000 that is 1/3 of our salary and subtract the $24,000(at least) in loan repayments this year. That leaves the attorney with the SMALL FORTUNE of....$29,000. After rent it looks like that associate is going to be eating a lot of ramen noodles.

Skadden showing LaTTTham up, yet again.

Shame on you LaTTTham.

Though I appreciate your point, 124, your math is a little skewed. First, Skadden is paying up to $1000 a month for people's student loans:

"Attorneys participating in the program will receive one third of their current annual salary in a single lump sum payment. During an attorney's participation in the program, the Firm will also reimburse outstanding law school student loans (if any) at their current repayment rate to a maximum of $1,000 a month and COBRA costs."

So that's an upside, for sure. The downside that you didn't consider in your post is that the associates who participate won't get a check for $53,000 - they'll get a check for $53,000 minus federal and state withholdings...which aren't insignificant.

So it's not that you're wrong in your conclusion, just that you didn't get there quite the right way.

126, I realized that after I posted...but figured it would be too confusing to go back and correct myself for those who think $53,000 for an associate is a small fortune. Thank you for the correction!

127 - no prob. I only went and looked it up because I couldn't remember if the loan repayment was part of it or not.

Just in case it wasn't clear, we are in accord on the ridiculousness of the complaints that these associates are getting a "small fortune."

124 - Not all T14 big firm associates have incredible debt. If you don't $50K to do nothing or anything you want is a pretty nice bit of money. I'd grab it if offered. And news to you - a lot of people working in Biglaw are non-T14 alums that got scholarships and have no debt.

ha, y'all complain on one hand about taxes that are going to cost you maybe 5k more per year while gloating that 50k is practically nothing for ultra-badasses such as yourselves

129-I am sorry my family does not have a trust fund.

For the rest of you, I get the feeling either a lot of non-lawyers are readin this blawg, or a bunch of Thomas Cooley students.....

Actually, either way its a bunch of non-lawyers, forgive me.

Sorry all, the correct answer is $68,000.

Q: What is a small fortune for not working?
A: $68,000

Thank you for playing.

yooo, this is just a 4 month severance instead of the usual 3 month one, that's what's up bitches

They will hire these people back. Then fire them 6 weeks later.

The person I know who was laid off at Latham got 6 months severance at full pay, so if this is truly a severance check, sounds like Skadden is falling short.

118--Uhhh. I have a clerskhip, a job at a top five, went to an Ivy, and I'm getting my 50k bonus. You have a flawed premise, old boy.

Nevertheless, if I were not an absolute moron, I would realize that made 27k as a teacher before law school. Do the math. Small fortune.

If I were a younger man full of piss and vinegar, I would take the 50k and maybe get a job as a DA, learn how to try a case, while you review documents, and then become a fabulously weathy plaintiff's attorney with my experience.

If I were a younger man at Skadden, I would take the year off and move to Florida, get a cheap golf membership off of someone swindled by Madoff, and work on my short game all year.

The possibilities are endless. Now, if they force you to do it, that's a different story. But, of course, I am not younger, but I also did not opt to take the sidebar. I'm going to work: at Skadden.

"115 -- You and others keep reiterating that 50k is a small fortune, without any basis for the statement. That amount is about a year's salary for an average person. Since when is that a fortune of any size???

Considering that most of the Skadden sidebar people are going to be functionally unemployed for a year (at least), I'd say that doubly reinforces my point, as they're going to need the money to pay rent and eat. That's not the situation of an overly entitled rich person, but an over-educated, under-employed person entering what is almost certainly a nerve-racking and unanticipated turn in his/her career. Your jealously of the formerly successful is really transparent and very peculiar given that most of the Skadden sidebar participants are probably less than pleased about their circumstances."

It's 136 again. I mean c'mon people. WTF is this with all the student loan debt BS? Your fault for going to a top school. I did, but I knew I was whoring myself; plus, Skadden pays your health benes and 1000k for student loans.

If I had gone to State U. on that scholarship (because I studied in college and worked two hours a night for six months on the LSAT) instead of going Ivy, I'd have a nice DA gig, where I left at 5, read a lot of novels, and could actually be a genuine Democrat, because let's be honest, the ladies I like like Dems, instead of a guy who leased, I mean leased-didn't-even-finance my Mercedes as a first year.

Instead, I've got shitloads of bankruptcy remote students loans and my life is over, especially if I take this sidebar option to defer my loans (except the 1000/month Skadden pays) and get my Skadden paid health insurance $10/co-pays in order (for full medical) for the year, so I can learn how to windsurf in the Caymans.

Ohhhhh. Ohhhhhh. Someone hold me....Now, if you thought, Gee, I really like the Wolf Block office decor, you're doomed, but then again you made that choice.

Yeah, I'm sure the Sidebar people are jumping for joy over their four months severance.

138, it's 136 here. If you make it look like it is voluntary and then the NY Times gets a story planted, I mean planted, then the illusion that it is voluntary, soul searching, and life affirming becomes reality. It's genius.

Nevertheless, Skadden is lock-step, and they are not getting rid of the best people, so if you worked hard and diversified yo' self, then you will make out better than these sidebar slackers, who hid in their offices and looked at ATL all day or who chose a department like M&A during a full blown M&A bubble. Bought at the top and are now sellling at the bottom. "Geez, I guess doing private equity law wasn't really that sexy after all."

They screwed their staff (some of whom had been there 20+ years) with 2 months severance so they could soft fire these associates with 1/3 salary...nice

of course staff should get something, but let's face it, it's a law firm and lawyers are the key. they need to take care of their lawyers way more than consider the staff - recruits, vault, clients etc. don't really look into staff when judging the firm.

i appreciate the South Park, underpants gnomes reference.
Step 1: Collect Underpants
Step 2: ....
Step 3: Profit!!

Honestly....since when did it begome a paralegal firm? Look, I love the staff as much as the rest of us...and greatly appreciate them. However, the paralegals and admin staff should be the first to go. We can't use the Obama model in law and take out the "big guys" in favor of the "little guy," we would have no one to sign off on work!

139 -- 138, 118 here. I agree it's a genius effort by the Skadden PR/HR folks. Still don't think 50-80k in exhchange for a year lay-off, voluntarily or not, is properly characterized as any kind of "fortune."

People here are stupid. It's a lot of money to do nothing for a few months. It's not a lot of money if the economy doesn't improve, and they don't actually have Skadden jobs to go back to. And can't find comparable (or any) other jobs.

143 is right. Unfortunately, the staff will get hit the hardest. But it's not like associates make out so much better. We get laid off, 'soft fire,' deferred, and suffer salary cuts because greedy partners (as a group) don't want to take the slighest hit to PPP in the worst recession since the Great Depression. If I was one of the affected associates, I'be pretty damn annoyed. Obviously, everyone is self-interested--including and maybe especially Partners-and they worked very hard to get where they are.

But my lawfirm had PPP of almost $2.5 million for 2008. We have not had any layoffs, salary cuts, of deferrments, but I'm very sure that we would do so if necessary even if a very small drop in PPP could avoid it all.

Nor do I give a rat's ass what fake Partner Emeritus has to say on the matter if he chimes in. No one else should either.

124 here-I do want to raise an issue...a serious issue that I see on this board. I feel some people on here are offended and think many of us are elitists. We are elitists to think that this Sidebar proposal is anything but a soft-fire, and not a lot of money. I truly appologize to those of you who are offended.

That being said, and the appology having been offered I would like to suggest a rememdy to this issue.

You should create your own website, one for those of you who went to Cooley, Florida Coastal, Charleston etc etc etc. We truly don't think we are better people than you...we just work in completely different industries. Many of you are not currently practicing law, whether it is a bar failure, inability to obtain employment, or another reason, let alone practicing in the BigLaw sweatshops, so we do not expect you to understand, please don't take offense. We wish you the best, however feel it may be best to create your own site and enjoy the time with your peers.

Again, we commend your effort and desire to practice law. These open enrollment schools certainly serve a function for providing continued education for those who otherwise would not be able to secure seat in a law school. However, it may be beneficial to your career and the career of your peers to have discussion and information related to your industry...not BigLaw.

Good luck in your future and I hope that you consider forming a new site related to Legal aid clinics, contract review, etc...

The NYT don't try to appeal to average americans, they try to be as elitist as all of you. it's just that their definition of elite is traveling the world, not slaving away behind a computer screen with no life... for years on end... for a few hundred thousand dollars a year. if you guys want to be so special, try inheriting a trust fund. big law lawyers paying student loans will never be the "country's elite." nice try though.

Look at some of the comments on the NYT piece. Very snarky!

I don't have any opinion on Skadden or Sidebar, but the animosity towards lawyers (they earn a fortune, they're "rich") seems ridiculous. The bar to enter the profession is pretty high (law school, bar exam, etc.), and very few people in the population are willing to put in that amount of effort, let alone willing to finance such an education.

It has always bugged me that friends of mine who chose to take easier routes (jokingly, but with a grain of seriousness), act like I'm "rich" and have it so easy.