To Defer or Not To Defer. To Sabbatical or not to Sabbatical. Those are the Questions.
At the first-of-its-kind public interest job fair for deferred associates yesterday, there were some in attendance who were weighing the decision about whether to go pro bono at all. While deferrals are mandatory at some firms, others have offered up voluntary yearlong deferrals to 3Ls with a stipend attached for public interest work, as well as offering yearlong public interest sabbaticals to current associates.
On yesterday’s Dreams of Biglaw Deferred post, one commenter asked:
Can we get an open thread on the pros and cons of accepting a voluntary deferral offer?
Many firms have a tradition of pro bono rotations, sending attorneys (and sometimes paralegals) off to legal services firms for 2 to 6 months, to run cases, get trial experience, and see how stressed out and low-paid are those who have chosen careers in public interest. But the economic crisis has taken this to a whole new level. One big question is: if you accept this glorious opportunity to take a salary cut and do good works, will your firm be willing to put you back into the golden handcuffs of Biglaw when the year is up?
One third-year associate at the career fair is actually busy these days, but considering taking the yearlong pro bono sabbatical opportunity, because he’s burned out. He’s fairly confident a job will be there for him when he wants to return. A 3L considering an optional yearlong deferral (of the type offered to incoming associates at Fried Frank, Proskauer Rose, Weil, and White & Case, among others) is worried about the possibility that there won’t be a job waiting around in 2010/2011.
But there’s another way of looking at it. Taking a deferral now might prevent being a layoff in the near future. More, and (UPDATE at 12:40) a poll(!) , after the jump.
Taking a deferral now might actually improve your job security, or as one commenter put it:
take deferral and cash - pray you don’t get fired shortly thereafter. Do not take deferral - watch yourself get fired sooner.
White & Case partner Jack Pace and Newark Mayor Cory Booker (YLS ‘97 and former Skadden fellow) spoke at the fair and both made the argument for the benefits of pro bono work. See the excellent Booker remarks captured here by AmLaw’s Ross Todd. Pace talked about the skills to be gained by lawyers who might spend the next year doing landlord-tenant, immigration, or family law: working with clients, learning to deal with facts of a client’s case (especially bad facts), writing briefs, getting in front of a judge, etc.
Another question that we haven’t seen answered yet is the status these folks will have post-deferral. What class/year will you be considered once you do join the firm?
So what do you think? If deferring (or going on a pro bono sabbatical) is an option, how should lawyers opt?
Newark Mayor: Challenges of the Economy Mean Opportunities for Law Grads [AmLaw]
(114) Comments
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
i'm so firsty
This post doesn't say anything. Totally useless.
^ I think the point is to encourage discussion in the comments.
^ sneaky way to up the hit count on the website
There is absolutely no upside to deferring for a year. In case you hadn't noticed the Dow is flying upwards on a weekly basis. The recession is over and Biglaw's insatiable demand for warm associate bodies will return later this year. 3Ls shouldn't act foolishly just because some firms have. Start as early as possible, viva la boom!
So long as you take the deferal on the presumption you won't have a job when done, you should be fine!
I mean, it just doesn't make sense. Law firms will fulfill their pro bono hours by having deferals out in public interest billing 8 hours a day. Pro bono will no longer be an inside the office kind of thing (at least during the 2009-2010 cycle).
When these defered "associates" finish up, the firm will say, "it just isn't fair for us to turn down our hard working summer associates of 2009 in order to take you. Besides, your life last year was good. You got 60-80k to work 9-5 doing something you LOVE."
Get the hell out. Take your money, start making new connections and put yourself in a position going forward. You'll have more people in your "network," and maybe even more hands-on experience.
If you stick around, you're going to look like a major wanker once you're laid off, and the partners will view you as needy and desperate.
Dow is up guy is a broker. Evil scum.
I walked into that pro bono office and was like screw you guys, I'm going home.
I would take the deferral. At least you'll get some practical experience for a year, which your classmates that start at the firm may or may not get before they are laid off. One year of 9-5 experience and a semi-guaranteed job is a better option than 6 months of big firm experience with very low billables because the work that will net you valuable experience just isn't available.
Even if you lose a year of class standing, I'd rather be the overly competent first year (after a year of public interest) than the standard incoming first year--who do you think the partners will assign their work to, assuming billing rates are equal?
My uncle is a partner (and, I think, a fairly high up one in the informal authority chain) at one of the firms which is offering a year-deferral. He told me (a 3L) to tell my friends not to take them because at his firm, the full year deferral is tantamount to a firing- and if you got an mandatory year-long deferral, you should consider yourself fired. The only reason, he said, that they deferred rather than fired was to maintain the appearance of not revoking offers and to keep people around for the slight chance that things pick up dramatically in the next several months.
I don't know if this is true for other firms but it is decidedly true for his firm. I am not flame and I am not bullshitting-- I'm sure many of the people on this thread will think otherwise but do so at your risk.
can we have a discussion about whether or not dow is up guy is flame. for a while i thought it was, but now i'm pretty sure the guy's serious.
The Dons at these firms are making people "an offer they can't refuse."
Look how many firms have pushed back start dates from what they previously announced. There is not even close to a guarantee that if you turn this down, you will start when they are now claiming you will. And when this decision is made, you won't get a second bite at the cherry.
Take the PI position and the money! If the market does turn, you'll either have your position, or you'll have great experience and that T14 resume you've always had, and can join the pickups that growing-again firms will make.
This is an easy call. The firms are doing everything but making it for you.
I know my firm offers this option.
My main concern is I would be coming back as a SECOND-year associate. I can only imagine if I come back and can't get work right away I might be the first laid off.
Other than that I'd definitely take it.
What is with the lack of actual reports the past few days? The vast majority of the posts have been BS (Bread Line, Sweet Hot Justice, etc.) and this one is just re-wording a post from yesterday with some of the comments already built in. I think ATL has forgotten what they did before the Recession/Layoffs.
Dare I say: "The ship be sinkin"?
Once again, I turn to the comments section to sift through the garbage for any actual insight missing from the article . . . .
11 - at least try a new relative, the "my uncle is a partner" flame is getting old.
Get a clue, 2009ers. Your firm doesn't need you or want you. Employment always lags the Dow, and this situation will not have changed by the fall.
If your firm is making this offer, it's because they're too scared to outright rescind. Take advantage of their weakness. Live a year on their dime, and hope for recovery by 2010.
I took a lifelong deferral. I'm in government so I always do good work...unlike you jerks who whore yourselves to corporations for money.
Take a year off...your ass will need it.
I'm at Thompson Hine and they started passing out stealth layoffs like it was going out of style, then shoved a 1/6th paycut down everyone's throat (while going insane on expected hours from we poor remaining bastards), AND a round of layoffs.
I would give my right testicle for the chance to take a year and work at a sane pace for a reasonable stipend.
TAKE THE DEFERRAL! If you don't and get laid off, your firm is done with you. If you take it and they don't want to give you a position when it is over, make some noise about it and watch as they start using connections to find you something to shut you up.
It's not ideal, but taking the deferral makes you a willing cost-savings and means the firm maintains some obligation to do something for you after the program (not b/c the partners are nice, of course, but b/c screwing the program people will look bad for them LATER when the economy is presumably better).
I'm sick of hearing people say that their firm offered them a great deal to take a year off... BS guys. Get real with yourselves. You are screwed.
If you were a partner and they told you, we need to cut your pay by 70k so we can give it to 3Ls to do public interest crap... You'd be pissed.
I deferred from a v10 (so Skadden, Latham, or Weil) and found a bombass job, so it's possible!
I know a few of my deferred colleagues did as well, so I think the new deferrals like S&S will have a tougher time since we've already flooded the market.
I'm sick of hearing people say that their firm offered them a great deal to take a year off... BS guys. Get real with yourselves. You are screwed.
If you were a partner and they told you, we need to cut your pay by 70k so we can give it to 3Ls to do public interest crap... You'd be pissed.
Layoffs at Vedder Price today.
My firm offered this, and I’ve already lined up a public interest gig. I’m in DC, so they’re not that hard to find. Less than ideal, but whatever. Better than waiting to get rescinded or fired. At least I can sleep, knowing what I’m doing next year.
19,
Hahahaha! That is so true! I'm now Counsel with the Gov't after escaping BigLaw back in '07 before the market completely went to hell.
I leave work every day at 4:30, and have taken every last drop of my vacation every year with zero complaint. When you factor in student loan repayment program, subsidized day care, cheaper insurance, and all the other fringe benefits... well, it's still a paycut from BigLaw, but my life is 400% improved for a 20% paycut (after factoring in the added value of gov't benefits package and perks. More like 35% before that).
I feel bad for those trying to jump on the federal gov't bandwagon now. I don't know any hiring committee with less than 250 applications for attorney positions.
I'm sick of hearing people say that their firm offered them a great deal to take a year off... BS guys. Get real with yourselves. You are screwed.
If you were a partner and they told you, we need to cut your pay by 70k so we can give it to 3Ls to do public interest crap... You'd be pissed.
#23, why are you being such an asshole to people?
I'm sick of hearing people say that their firm offered them a great deal to take a year off... BS guys. Get real with yourselves. You are screwed.
If you were a partner and they told you, we need to cut your pay by 70k so we can give it to 3Ls to do public interest crap... You'd be pissed.
Layoffs at Vedder Price today.
My firm offered this, and I’ve already lined up a public interest gig. I’m in DC, so they’re not that hard to find. Less than ideal, but whatever. Better than waiting to get rescinded or fired. At least I can sleep, knowing what I’m doing next year.
21/23
It's about the bottom line. Taking 70K to pay an incoming to do pro bono saves the partner MORE than 70K if there's not enough work to be done in the office.
Anyway, if you do this and come back a year later, I imagine you'd be in better shape than the normal incoming 1st years.... this is because the firm has already made an additional investment in you, AND you have some real experience already.
I'm more interested in 14's comment about coming back as a 2nd year. That could have some interesting repercussions.
19,
That is so true! I'm also Counsel with the Fed. Gov't after escaping BigLaw back in '07 before the market completely went to hell.
I leave work every day at 4:30, and have taken every last drop of my vacation every year with zero complaint. When you factor in student loan repayment program, subsidized day care, cheaper insurance, and all the other fringe benefits... well, it's still a paycut from BigLaw, but my life is 400% improved for a 20% paycut (after factoring in the added value of gov't benefits package and perks. More like 35% before that).
I feel bad for those trying to jump on the federal gov't bandwagon now. I don't know any hiring committee with less than 250 applications for attorney positions.
That picture is racist to Asian-Americans.
There should at least have been a poll included in this post.
Taking a deferral is the easiest way to remove yourself from partnership track, and for firms who are really hurting, steady employment.
It shows that you are not serious about BigLaw, that you are terrified by a challenging economy, and that you have no personal investment in your firm.
-GW 1L
p.s. If you wanted to do public interest, you didn't have to go to a T25 school at $40k a year. U of Richmond would have been fine.
The people who don’t take this are f*cked. Think of it from the firm’s perspective: everyone knows the economy’s sh*t, they’re doing everything they can to maintain faith, and your greedy ass is telling them where to put it. Your name will be the first on the layoffs list when you show up for “work.”
I deferred and I am happy.
I went straight through from college and wasn't ready to sell my soul to the corporate world just yet. If they don't have a job for me in 2011, I will make a rational decision about what to do next.
Working at a firm is not the be-all end-all of the legal profession.
Hit "Post Comment" only once. It seems like it takes a while to post, but it does post.
Elie/Lat/whoever the hell is running this show...please speak with the techies and see if we can get this problem fixed.
I'm sick of reading every post 20 times.
If my secretary rips one more goddamn Road-Warrior ....something bad will happen...real bad.
To everyone complaining about lack of substance in posts:
Wake up! That is part of ATL's business model. They drive up hits by posting inflammatory yet analysis-free articles and then have people go nuts in the comments section, which involves lots of unique and repeat hits. Its annoying but at least realize what they are doing.
@41, stop treating everyone like Somalians. You are such an asshole.
36: you have no idea what you're talking about. lots of people leave biglaw, come back, and become partners. it's not like the only reason to take the deferral is because you're lazy and uninterested in biglaw.
also, it's not exactly easy to get a public interest gig. it takes a t14 degree to get your foot in the door anywhere decent.
14:
I suppose coming back as a second year makes you more susceptible to layoffs. But if your firm is still laying people off at that time, they’re going to defer bringing you back anyway. Maybe extend the program, or something. And depending on what you spent your year doing, you might be more valuable to them than the in-firm second years who have been hanging on for dear life to 30 hrs a week of doc review.
36-are you really going to tell people about what's partnership track a semester and a half into law school? I've been doing this for nine years, and the determinants of partnership track have gone up in smoke in the past 6 months.
Sorry this is a little off-topic, but I have to go to Midland, Michigan for a deposition next week. Does anyone have any recommendations on what to do or see?
- Marching to Midland
Based on what happened when first years were deferred during the downturn following the dot com bust in the early 2000's, there is a good chance a lot of the jobs will be gone forever and many of these deferrals will turn into revocations.
I'm a BigLaw Partner whose been around long enough to know.
47:
Wow, thanks for the free advice, BigLaw Partner! I’m so glad you take time out of your busy day to help out us young folks on these tough decisions!
You must think very poorly of your intended audience. I mean, really “BigLaw Partner?” Just make your point. Don’t discredit it with a ridiculous lie.
45,
Nine years!!!!! Sounds like you don't really know what's going on either if you are still posting on ATL - I bet you're a partner right? Nine years - pathetic. Better luck in the future.
-36
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
Deferrals are interesting enough- see the below for a great commentary on what people really think about deferrals: http://justmarvy.blogspot.com/2009/04/step-right-up-piglet-in-wellies.html
A deferral is tantamount to life banishment from the firm or any respectable peer firm. The classes of 2009, 2010 and 2011 are essentially ostracized pariahs of the legal profession. Good luck in your alternate careers.
49 - you have no idea what the world is like out there... in the real world.
I'm banging someone in the ass later today, anyone have suggestions for what type of lube I should use?
Vermont Beef
50,
"Cant' get out even if you want to" - unless your firm signed a contract with you (thus giving you job security), then you are an employee at will (or not even an employee at all, if you aren't a current associate). Whoever told you that is full of crap, and as a lawyer you are supposed to be knowledgeable enough to have figured that out for yourself.
This practice certainly isn't new, see this 2002 article about Mintz Levin deferalls:
http://pittsburgh.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2002/09/16/story2.html
Anyone have any insight into what actually happened to those who deferred at Mintz Levin?
A lucky few of you who are required to pursue alternate careers can still audition for my house boy position(s). Only males. Bring a thong.
HAHA 9 is hilarious!
People who don't take the deferrals are crazy. It's basically free money. The choice isn't between the deferral offer and Biglaw as you know it, it's between the deferral offer and the huge possibility of being laid off and/or having your salary cut.
Some of us have been pushed back to January with no stipend whatsoever. Those deferral offers look pretty good to us.
I'm banging someone in the ass later today, anyone have suggestions for what type of lube I should use?
Vermont Beef
The ship be sinking...
You know which top firm didn't offer a deferral option? CADWALADER. You know why? BECAUSE SECURITIZATION IS BACK!
55,
I know that. But, just as you have to repay your bar exam expenses and the like if you are not employed with the firm for a full year, the language they sent me seems to indicate the same rules apply here. That is what I meant. So either they were implying that I'd have to pay back the $60-75k or that I'd have to work for a year before leaving the firm. I made no claim that it wasn't an at-will arrangement.
-50
#60 - Use Crisco.
The dows up guy is full of shit, anybody short sighted enough to think the dow is going to get this economy back on track is seriously whacked. Fundamentals people. Fundamentals.
63,
Hmm, maybe the repayment clause is your employment guarantee. If they fire you in that year, they don’t get any of their money back, and little to none of the benefits from spending it.
Look, just a guess, but if you could straight-up ask your Managing Partner whether you should take the deferral, I think he’d say yes. That’s why the firm offered it. So there has be a REALLY good reason to tell them no.
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
I asked my firm whether their program was a way to delay layoffs and was told it was "NOT a deferral program" and "not a way to weed people out" and that we are fully expected to report to work once done (can't get out of it even if you want to).
I know some people will say, "and you believe them?!" ... BUT, assuming what they say is true, is it beneficial to your career long-term or detrimental? They've been pushing me to apply. I'm a clerk and I'm already afraid for being a year behind - being 2 years behind my class seems like suicide. It's hard to believe they want to push me out the door before I even start... but still, it seems like "if you don't apply, you'll be stealth layoff fodder"
and I'm IP lit - so it's not like I won't be billing hours (our lit department is on pace to average more than 2000 billables this year). it seems weird that they'd want me gone rather than some corporate first year.
help?
I did not press "post" more than once. I refreshed after clicking "Comments" from the main page, after posting. Apologies for the inadvertent multiple postings.
-50, 63, 68-71
If you have to either defer or wait for your start date - I'd try to work with one of the firm's pro-bono clients to show that you are committed to the firm's goals. When biglaw picks up it's not just going to be about having warm bodies to fill the offices - its going to be about having attorneys who have demonstrated competencies in areas that firm's care about such as managing document reviews, litigation experience, court room experience, and lawyer bargaining experience. Clients are more wary of forking over huge fees after this downturn and they are going to be asking more questions about the attorneys that are staffing their matters. If a 3L is looking at this downturn only through the lens of making sure they get a huge pay day before February 2010 they are missing the big picture and will not be as well-positioned as those who get meaningful experience outside of the firm and can bring that experience when they start work at the firm.
I did not press "post" more than once. I refreshed after clicking "Comments" from the main page, after posting. Apologies for the inadvertent multiple postings.
-50, 63, 68-71
I did not press "post" more than once. I refreshed after clicking "Comments" from the main page, after posting. Apologies for the inadvertent multiple postings.
-50, 63, 68-71
I did not press "post" more than once. I refreshed after clicking "Comments" from the main page, after posting. Apologies for the inadvertent multiple postings.
-50, 63, 68-71
I did not press "post" more than once. I refreshed after clicking "Comments" from the main page, after posting. Apologies for the inadvertent multiple postings.
-50, 63, 68-71
The comments at this place crack me up.
Here's the reality - if you do not take a deferral and the market does not turn around within 90-120 days after your arrival you are screwed. The odds of your delayed start becoming permanent go through the roof. Even if you get lucky and can actually start, you you run the risk of being laid off with no skill other than that of bragging "I was in BIGLAW reviewing documents" since nobody actually gives any 1st years any meaningful work to do in large commercial firms anyway.
Spend a year getting some real work experience under your belt (and anyone who has done public interest knows that it is NOT for the weakhearted - you will work your ASS off) and you preserve both options. If there are indeed "Big Law" jobs again, you haven't lost anything and can lateral back in (and contrary to the headhunter myth it is quite doable if you are indeed from a top-tier school). And when you do, you will have skills that put you ahead of the unskilled pack that you're competing with in the tournament, and get far better experience opportunities than if you just started clueless and egocentric like most elite first years do. If there are no jobs in BigLaw when your year is over, you are in a better position to get a permanent job anyway. In public interest or government. And you might actually be able to compete honestly for it, unlike now where the only reason the option is open to most of you is because the firms are begging the non-profit world to take you off their hands.. Chances are most of you posting here, you have zero public interest or law experience on your resumes now -- which means that the serious non-profits don't want you. (The only reason that they want you now in public interest is because the firms are making it free to them to take you.) That's right - your T1-14 means nothing in that world since you don't have any proof that you are actually committed to it. And non-profits have no money to waste on training folks who will not be around.
IMO the thing that will truly separate the wheat (those new associates with brains, drive and desire to succeed long term) from the chaff (those who are so hung up on "OMG what if I can't get back into BIGLAW" that they would rather sit on their butt for a year and whinge than actually build their resumes) will be these new public interest deferral programs.
79 = TTT parter hoping he'll convince some 3Ls to defer and push up his PPP; or alternatively a 3L trying to justify his poor decision to defer.
My firm let me know that those deferred associates will come in as first years IN 2010.
Another interesting post would be: what are people who got less cash from their firms supposed to do in this position? Should they take the stipend and work for free or risk it and look for paid work (i.e. clerkship/small firms)?
49- what's pathetic about a 2000 grad posting on ATL? Unlike you, I can say that I've at least made it as a lawyer, and, unlike you, I may actually have some experience to share with the newbies. Why do I need a dipshit law student like you to wish me luck?
74--
Excellent, excellent point. Just one thing to add. Make sure the decision-makers know that's what you're doing.
BUT WHAT ABOUT WEIL'S PERSONAL ASSURANCE THAT WE WOULD HAVE A POSITION???
THEY ASSURRED US!!!!!!!!
How is it that so many of us are smart enough to get into BigLaw, but stupid enough to believe what the partners tell us? Any thoughts?
Yale grads are poor lawyers, poor policy-makers, but great professors.
Discuss.
35, point well taken. Poll added. Thanks for the suggestion!
This is really dumb.
ATL editors, please think about the utility of "open posts" on any subject matter. All we get are a bunch of anonymous comments that no one can evaluate effectively. I, for one, could really use a definitive view on this question, but I can't tell which of the commenters are 0Ls trying to stir up anxiety and which are people who actually have some inside knowledge or information. It doesn't do us any good to just hash back and forth about what may or may not be the consequences of deferring or not deferring. We need something concrete.
And that is, I would think, your job, ATL editors. Those of us out in the field can't ask our superiors questions like, "Okay, so what /really/ is going on in terms of workflow, and what are you going to do to me if I don't defer?" /You/ can ask those questions, and we need you to ask them. Telling us what other commenters have said and what some guy said at some fair generally about the value of pro bono work does not help us here.
I don't know what everyone is talking about re: "pace" in public interest firms. This may be the case in gov't work, but in my experience, the attorneys (and summers) usually work 10-12 hour days, have huge case loads and many of the first years are in court the day they pass the bar. Great experience, but still high stress. I guess the difference is we love the work and our clients so we don't see it as a bad thing.
Those of you taking a public interest position at organizations like the ACLU, Public Counsel and Legal Aid expecting to do little work will be in for a huge surprise. Plus, no doubt your firm will hear about your work ethic - if you left at 5 p.m. when everyone else left at 9 p.m., that won't go unnoticed and will be shared with your firm. That would be a VERY good reason for a firm not to welcome you back.
If I were you, I'd treat any public interest gig as a year-long interview. Those that work harder will be more likely to be welcomed back to the firm. Those who screw around will probably find themselves without a job after a year.
My firm offers this as well. Having a business background I would like to put this deferral into an analogous business concept.
Management offers the employees a voluntary retirement package ( a la GM). Guess what comes next?
Involuntary retirement.
Further, from what the senior associates tell me here. "The firm will guarantee you have a job at the end of the deferral--for at least one day."
Point of discussion: If you are looking to get into corp transactional work (the ones hit hardest anyway), then the "real experience" everyone is talking about that you are supposed to get from PI work doesn't really apply. PI work is all lit (I don't count incorporating 501(c)(3)'s as experience in BIGLAW corporate). So if you can't somehow get into, say, an in-house position working for free and living off your stipend, you are damned if you do and damned if you dont: 1) defer and get no "real" experience, less pay for a year, and -hopefully- have a job next year, or 2) don't defer and get no "real" experience for 6 mos-1 year, likely get laid off and thrown into the abyss, but at least get a fulle salary for that time. It's not even necessarily about being greedy, its about advancing your career in a meaningful and being able to create opportunities for yourself down the road, and pimpin aint easy.
Kash, I do not know if its just because its Spring time or because you have a certain smoldering sexuality to your posts, but you make me flush with the fever.
Lord Humongous
3Ls - take the PI deferral if your firm offers this option. Come to grips with the fact that you have no practical skills right now outside of research. If a public interest position offers any type of practical legal experience, take it. Even if your firm doesn't bring you back, you'll have a little market value when you get done with your assignment. And, assuming they don't bring you back, you can spin their decision any way you want because they've never had the chance to "evaluate" you. Work for six months and get laid off? Well, stealth layoffs happen everywhere, even at shops where they admit that some reductions are economic based. They'll always look to can you for performance reasons first.
The only exception is those entering a restructuring/BK practice. If your firm has a decent practice, you'll get lots of experience right away. And if you are any good, you'll be safe for at least a year or two.
does anyone know what happens if you take the deferral and the stipend and then you end up, for whatever reason, not wanting to start in 2011 after all (i.e. if by some small chance you find some other job)? do you have to pay the stipend back or what?
94 - You better watch your mouth.
94 - We need to stop thinking about this money as a stipend and more as money to keep you from re-entering the BigLaw job market. The firms essentially get an option to bring in new labor when their business turns around. If you don't like that bargain, don't take the money. Otherwise, you will end up paying it back to the firm.
Does anybody really think that their Biglaw offer is somehow safer if they decide to voluntarily defer themselves? Doesn't it seem that a firm that lays off existing attorneys looks much worse than a firm that blows off pre-associates on fellowships?
Take the PI deferral if you actually have some interest but don't do it out of fear or speculation about whats going to happen with your offer. This is why they make fun of us for being risk averse.
Take a look at the 2009 summer associate #s. If they seem particularly bloated, don't defer. Also, 3Ls and first years are becoming almost fungible commodities in the current environment and their futures will depend increasingly on the ability to build personal relationships and connections, either at the firm or in alternative pursuits. Be guided accordingly.
91 - good point. I think this decision is very different if you're interested in Lit or Corp
97 - Well said. Why someone would choose to avoid getting in the door as quickly as possible is beyond me. You're afraid of being laid off? Don't bother showing up in the first place.
It's not like those who defer for a year will be "safe" to start at the firm in late 2010 while those who tried to get in earlier than that will be sent packing.
Bracewell pushed back to November today.
Well... back on topic. It's a bad idea to take sabbatical or deferment. (1) Biglaw is timeline conscious, which means if you are not tracking on the partnership timeline, then there is something wrong with you. A class of 2005 lawyer would be competing with class of 2006 lawyers, which is not a good thing. Pedigree and appearance is everything in big law. (2) Public interest people that do pro bono full time will not appreciate a temporary interloper; they would rather have your money than you taking up a position that could be filled by someone with commitment to the cause. Public interest lawyers make less than a third of what big law lawyers make, but they choose their job out of a sense of purpose. To have someone that chased the money after law school come in to do "public interest" could be seen as less than disingenuous. They would rather have you send a check than pretend to care about the cause.
Does anyone know if firms are allowing people to "defer" (and get the stipend) if they're going to clerk during the year off?
Make no mistake, your firm wants you to take the deferral. Given the context of these deferral offers, therefore, you are showing more commitment to the firm if you accept than if you decline.
There is no way that people who accept these offers will be lower on the totem pole that those who rejected them - either within the class or on the partnership track. This is especially true if you work with your firm's pro bono department to secure the best possible PI opportunity
What about the firms that only deferred until January '10? These 3L's got no option to take a PI job for a year, and have nothing else to do but wait -- and hope -- for their firm to honor its commitment.
I highly doubt that anyone will be starting in January. So it seems like these firms are just delaying the inevitable.
I think some people who comment on this blog need to get it through their heads that there is going to be a substantial portion of the Class of 2009 at firms with non-traditional resumes. Firms are going to realize this and it will not change the effected associates chances of making partner - otherwise they're likely writing off the classes of 2009, 2010, and possible 2011 as partnership-track associates.
40 - Your secretary is gross! And you just made my day.
Kash is hot. Does she like married men?
LOL, you kids just don't get it. None of you will ever start at your firms. A deferral is just a polite way of firing you. Trust me, look for other options right now, because BIGLAW is no longer an option for those who were deferred.
LOL, you kids just don't get it. None of you will ever start at your firms. A deferral is just a polite way of firing you. Trust me, look for other options right now, because BIGLAW is no longer an option for those who were deferred.
Everyone re-read 79 because that is right on the money. You whiners are hilarious.
The amount of negativity and nonsense, for example 109 & 110, here is embarrassing.
The legal market has changed and the class of 2009 is going to be a large group with unconventional resumes. Firms know this, because they have created this phenomenon. There is no reason to worry that deferring is going to reflect poorly on you in any way, because you are going to be among a class of similarly situated people, and the legal market will have to adjust to accommodate this rather unusual change.
It is really important to calm down, make an individual decision that you are comfortable with, and to ignore people who insist that deferral (or for that matter, starting in 2010) is necessarily an end of the world scenario. Most of you are intelligent, reasonable people, and I hope that you can see through this flame and negativity to realize that your plans may be changing, but you will rebound just fine. Don't make your decisions out of fear. Decide what you can manage financially and go with the flow. There is no reason to make yourself upset over something that is out of your control.
Good Luck.
Pro Defer: once in a lifetime opportunity to do whatever you want for a year financed by the firm; get experience; build a network in the next place you want to live (back near the homestead); get paid up front; wait for T/S work to reappear & not get pushed into litig/other area you may not like; don't get laid off in 4 months after locking into expensive lease & lifestyle in city inundated w/ laid off lawyers; shame of ATL may preserve a job for you
Con Defer: risk of no biglaw job after deferral (but setup new network & could get laid off anyway if don't defer); perception at firm of being a slacker (but they told you to take it & what's chance of becoming partner at these places anyways); don't get foot in door (but get into dept you don't want)
being deferred on a stipend is awesome. I got laid off and am cruising on my severance. and it's awesomeness.
www.laidoffdiary.blogspot.com
now I spend my days hanging out, drinking, talking shit about the miserable partners at my firm (just because it's fun), watching movies, going to museums, concerts, and taking naps.
I'd defer. Once you start in BigLaw, it sucks out your life and you can't ever stop until you are shown the door your 8th year after not making partner. but then you'll be old and fat and miserable and no one will want to hang out with you then. So take the deferment. BigLaw will always be there (well, not Thelen, but you know what I mean)