First?

First?

Offers at Kirkland are determined office by office. So NY, where a lot of the pharma IP work and restructuring happens may have higher offer rates than a smaller office that has less work ITE (I'm looking at you, LA).

First?

First?

First?

First?

Orrick offers are going out. I heard West Coast offices are all near 100%.

No offers?
How you like me now?

O'Melveny screwed over a bunch of us I know many at Boalt and Yale did not get offers from O'Melveny. Office I was in was only around 70 percent and was busy as hell with transactional associates billing over the minimum and people in lit all above 2500.

Orrick summers 100% deferred, 50% chance of ever working at Orrick.

Remember the last six times Kash said that something bad was happening at Kirkland? What ever happened with that? Or that? Or that? Or that?

O'Melveny screwed over a bunch of people. I know many at top ten schools (including 3 people at yale) did not get offers from O'Melveny. Office I was in was only around 70 percent offer rate despite being and busy as hell with transactional associates billing over the minimum and people in lit all above 2500.

holy shit, that is fucked. 0% ...

Way to pick up on what's happening about 2 weeks late. Did it take you people this long to wade through the 800+ comments from Part 2 of "100% Offer Rate"?

A few posts by both Kash and Elie today? That's rough MysTTTal, making you show your replacement how to do the job.

A few posts by both Kash and Elie today? That's rough MysTTTal, making you show your replacement how to do the job.

Law Offices of Laverne Treadwell just reported a 100% offer rate to its summer associate.

"Oh baby when you talk like that
You make a woman go mad.
So be WISE and keep on
Reading the signs of my body.

"And I'm on tonight
You know my hips don't lie
And I'm starting to feel it's right.
All the attraction... the tension...
Don't you see baby, this is perfection!"

how come when i press "post comment" my comment is only posted once. is my button broken?

BSF in NYC will be 100%. They take awhile to go out, but I haven't heard anything to suggest otherwise.

No offer at K&E NY. Arg.

Lowenstein Sandler was also not at 100% this year.

K&E SF summer here. I received my offer today. Not sure what the overall rate at the office was.

can ATL just consolidate all this fucking info? how hard is it to keep a spreadsheet or something?

Texas Bloodbaths:

30 of 70 (or less) at VE Houston

0 offers at Gardere

3 of 12 at Akin Gump Houston

Unspecified bloodbath around 50% offer rate at Baker Botts Houston and Dallas

Holy. Crap. F&R = 0%? Is that real or just sour grapes?

27 - Your V&E numbers are way off.

what was V&E DC's offer rate?

I heard V&E Houston was 40 out of 78.

The firms that have yet to make decisions are not cool.

0% at my F&R office. Fo' real.

33 - which office?

has anyone heard anything about cadwalader?

33 - 0% at mine too.

quinn - 50 % in la.

With all the layoffs at Kirkland, the no offers for the summers can't really be much of a surprise.

With all the layoffs at Kirkland, the no offers for the summers can't really be much of a surprise.

0% is BS. People claiming 0% of any firm, any office, without naming the firm and office are full of crap.

36-- How do you know that you aren't in the same office?

F&R Dallas: 2 of 6.

srsly, how fucked are these OCI people going to be?

41 - I don't know. However, I do know that at least one other F&R office was planning to no-offer its entire summer class.

35 - I'm also a CWT SA. I haven't heard anything.

35 - I'm a Cadwalader SA and I haven't heard anything.

44 - How would you even know that?

anyone know about locke lord in dallas or houston? have they given offers/no offers yet, suspected offers? Given the rest of what's happening in Texas, I'd guess its probably going to be bad for them too

i was a cwt SA also, and haven't heard anything. I expect my cold offer any day now.

Got an offer from KE SF today. No other information.

Break News: Law Offices of Laverne Treadwell may have to defer its incoming class to November 28, 2009, cuz Laverne may be upgrading his Dell computer.

Consistent with the firm's past practices, Latham will be giving offers to 100% of the class, but will be laying off 50% of them four months after they start.

I wasn't at a large office so regardless of where 36/41 is from, it sounds like at least 2 offices of 0%.

-33

"I see you, baby, shakin' that ass
Shakin' that ass
Shakin' that ass

"I see you baby shakin' that ass
Shakin' that ass
Shakin' that ass

"I see you baby shakin' that ass
Shakin' thay ass"

22--- We have, at best, 25 summer associates across the entire country. And maybe 1/2 of those will go clerk for a year. So I'd be surprised if we aren't at 100% firm wide.

47 - I'm not going to out my source. Obviously, you don't have to believe me if you don't want to. All I can offer is the truth.

56 - the truth? you can't handle the truth!

Any word on McDermott offers

57 - I lol'd.

-56

Can anyone confirm the Orrick West Coast near 100% rate?

Milbank no-offer. Know many others in same boat.

Don't bet on getting an offer from McDermott.

again, another completely useless post if tipsters/atl aren't going to disclose which offices the no-offers are in. for example, f&r did not no-offer everyone in their NY office so to assert that f&r has "ditched most of its summer associate class of 2009" is misleading and simply untrue.

We don't have anything even approaching news of any sort. Please post leads in the comments section so that we don't have to work very hard. Thank you.

- Above the Law

I don't think k and e gave many nooffers?

37 is right, Quinn LA around 50%, after they told everyone on the first day that business was great and they expected there would be offers for everyone.

They must be in some serious financial trouble. God help them if the Mattel case ever goes away. Deferrals and layoffs will start just as soon as recruitment is over.

Also who gives a shit about Orrick's offer rate? Has anyone taken contracts? An "offer" to begin an at-will job in 2012 is worthless.

65, you must be new here. ATL usually sensationalizes negative news about Kirkland.

66 - If you had taken contracts you would know about remedies to that situation under section 90.

66, the entire legal hiring market works on the basis of legally unenforceable "offers." The offer rate matters because it is the only way biglaw hiring of recent grads is done.

Fried Frank DC gave offers to their entire summer class

what about proskauer? radio silence from them.

someone please tell us more about lowenstein's douchebaggery. within weeks of rescinding an offer last year from a rutgers 3L, they had the gaul to put up a fucking 20-foot wide banner at law firm open night right in the middle of the atrium.

who'd they fuck this year?

Blank Rome in Philadelphia only made offers to 50% of its class.

f&r 0% here

f&r 0% here

K&L Gates no offered a LOT of people in LA and SF.

I got no-offered by my local cash-for-clunkers dealership.

I'm at Montero's Bar and made a move on Kash. She cold offered me.

Any one know about Morgan Lewis DC?

Don't worry guys, you can still apply at 3rd or 4th market insurance defense mills.

The cost of living is cheap!

And so is the living.

60 - I can confirm the Orrick offer rate. It's not 100% but close to it.

milbank offers finally out? any news on their stats for this year's summers?

72: Not sure about the %, but it wasn't 100% and they were admittedly not performance-based no-offers.

Big Law is so damn funny to me. I love everyone who went to a TTT like Harvard or Yale and actually thought they had "career" prospects.

My Goodwin office gave offers to 100% of the summers.

I can confirm Milbank no-offered a substantial portion of their NY summer class. Probably 50% or so.

86,

As a no-offered Milbank NY summer, that sounds about right. And it had nothing to do with performance.

--61

Two months from now, 100% of my "hybrid tough love" package will be embraced over 100% of deferred job offers that will never materialize.

81: which offices, and how close to 100%?

OMM offer rate was 60%

Crowell & Moring DC announced today. At least some no offers based on economic concerns. No idea on percentage yet

And Weil Gotshal? Don't you bother to check that NY dicked over all the satellites?

85- which Goodwin office is that?

anyone have info on any of Morgan Lewis offices? still waiting...

I don't know if getting an offer is a good thing. The firm will just defer you in about two or three months when it is too late to get a decent clerkship.

Another K&E offer in SF. haven't heard of any no-offers yet.

W&C Miami = 100%

We offered everyone b/c of a severe 1st year shortage. Latham--NYC.

We offered everyone b/c of a severe 1st year shortage. Latham--NYC.

We offered everyone b/c of a severe 1st year shortage. Latham--NYC.

27 -- What about Fulbright? Didn't they give offers this week? What was there offer rate?

People on these comments are so evil: "Ha ha, you're all screwed."

As a mid-level associate, I actually want to offer my sympathy for those of you still in law school. I can't imagine what it must be like. Best of luck.

Schiff Hardin is only hiring 50% or so and offers are admittedly not based on performance. Most firms are paying their partners out of debt, so it isn't surprising that they aren't hiring everyone. But it looks like even the few firms without debt are screwing summer associates. Schiff isn't a huge firm, so it destroys the view that smaller firms are any safer than the huge firms.

I was no-offered by the Boston office of Goodwin Procter. I have it from a partner that there were at least 5 no-offers (out of 35) in Boston and another 5 (out of 33) in the other offices. Goodwin maintains that the no-offers are "performance-based," rather than economic.

Anecdotal evidence from discussion with other summers and postings on ATL suggest that these numbers may be understated.

I'd like to help, but I'm only hiring wise Latinas.

explain "understated"

0%!!!!!

It really hurts getting F'd in the R by F&R!!!!!

At least this way, the don't have to rescind any offers next May.

A lot of my friends who are rising 3Ls are supposed to hear around Labor Day. Expect more news then.

Latham - near 100%

Guaranteed Fall 2010 start dates.

Back to V10!!!

Class of '08 here. My big firm offer turned into a deferral 8 months later, that turned into a layoff two months after I started. Now happily employed at small botique for about 60% of the pay. But still wouldn't wish the process I went thru on anyone. My advice...forget big law for now. Just find a steady job at a small firm doing what you want to do. An offer from a big law firm is worth dirt now anyways

K&E Chicago made offers today. Every summer associate I spoke to received an offer

Fuck. This. Shit.

Latham just laid me off from my summer associate job.

- Suicidal Laid Off Latham Summer

What's with all the Kirkland trolls in the comments? Kash reported that Kirkland no-offered every single summer. You must be lying.

Still no word from shearman yet...

109

LOL at you.

Latham also told the 2008 class they wouldn't be laid off. Guess how much a "guarantee" from latham means

Keep in mind most of these firms made offers to their current summers before the economy went in the toilet last year. It should not be surprising they are not giving 100% offers for the most part. As for the OCI process this year, hopefully firms will not be so foolish to assume the economy will be stable by summer 2010. Why take on 30 summers to only hire 15 of them again? There is no excuse if this happens next year.

That said, #91 - I heard Crowell no offered a third of their summers in DC (approximately 10 people). Heard NYC no offered some as well.

Morgan & finnegan 100% offers! Woohooo!!!!!!

Heller 20% booooo

It's a god damn race to the bottom...

what's going on at K&L Gates Boston?

104 - so they say it was performance based. How was your mid-summer review? Did you see it coming, or were you getting good feedback?

But I haven't seen any other ATL posting about no-offers at Goodwin, and I've been looking around these boards a lot, so I don't think that can really support any kind of vast no-offer rumor.

any word on Schulte?

Quinn no offered less than 6 people in LA. Percentages here are wrong. At least two were for good cause.

I feel sorry for the Quinn Emanuel summers, if that is true. It's truly a horrible place to work, though--they'll be better off in the long run.

K&E SF corporate offer rate 100%--cannot confirm other practice areas but I imagine they are the same

122- Mid-summer review was largely positive-- certainly nothing to suggest the end result. A couple of points for improvement, but nothing serious. I got lots of good feedback, but I sort of saw it coming, too. A general awkwardness.

For other discussion on Goodwin, see: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/08/summer_offer_rate_open_thread_2.php?show=comments#comments. There are 900+ posts, but just word-search "Goodwin."

Dear dumbasses,

Your latham offer is at best a "maybe." Once Latham fall further in rankings and starts loosing its work like a rotting rat it is, they will not need more monkeys to do the work, thus you will be "deferred." Look for another job you idiots or you will suffer the same fast as us.

WHO THE FUCK WOULD CHOOSE LATHAM IN THIS ECONOMY?!?!?!??!?!?

I love how people who didn't get an offer say it wasn't "performance based." Face it, you guys suck. It might not have been your work product, but it was still based, on some level, on your potential. You could have been no offered becuase you are an ugly fuck who would never attract a client, or because you are a socially awkward nerd. It doesn't matter. Law firms don't arbitrarily decide who to offer and who to no-offer. Keep telling yourself otherwise to make yourself feel better.

Paul Weiss is the tits

Another K&E NY no offer here. God. What the fuck am I going to do now? So fucking awful. Fuck this firm.

two comments:

1. where are tipsters sending these info in? what about people making comments? I wonder if law firms, with all the $ in the world, are tracking everyone = ) I know I would if I ran a firm hahaha.

2. F&R = 0% is concerning since I just had OCI with them.

130: Eat a dick sandwich. TIA

133

if firms had "all the $ in the world" would they be no offering/laying off?

K&E no offered me, too. How do you go from 3.5 GPA at a top school to no life prospects whatsoever? What do I do with my life now?

130- Nobody's saying it's not our own fault. Performance-based or not, they still have to choose who to keep and who to let go, and we got the cut. But it sucks to tell the summer (and her potential future employers) that it was performance-based (implying incompetence or worse) when they're really making cuts based on economics.

It's not like this year's summer classes are suddenly brimming with incompetents, especially given the trimming of summer classes many firms did on the front end. The bottom 20% of the class this year is probably at or above the prevailing standard of prior years. If it's the economy that's at issue, why saddle the summers with needless stigma?

135

ya, like 130 said, maybe the no offers simply didn't deserve it?

can't get too use to 100% offer rate during booming offers, just like you can't count on real estate to keep climbing = p it's gotta come down at some point, just don't shit your pants when it does.

135

ya, like 130 said, maybe the no offers simply didn't deserve it?

can't get too use to 100% offer rate during booming economies, just like you can't count on real estate to keep climbing = p it's gotta come down at some point, just don't shit your pants when it does.

133 - you should go to F&R. They clearly have not dicked over two class years in a row. They clearly have all the money in the world. You deserve each other.

O'Melveny New York no-offered around 60% of its transactional summer group, most for seriously bullshit reasons. This among a very small group! You'd have to be absolutely insane to work there next year.

To all the no-offerees feeling like their lives are basically over:

First, my sympathies for the difficulty of this.

Second, this is not the end of the world. It seems that way, especially if you go to a good school where Biglaw jobs are the normal career path for new grads. However, literally the first day of your bar-review course when you see all the recent grads from other schools, you will realize that this is merely a temporary setback and that you still have a great career in the law ahead of you. You now are like the 90% of lawyers who didn't start in biglaw, but your school name and academic performance will nonetheless be a great assist to your career.

Kirkland Chicago no-offer here. Absolutely no explanation given, even when pressed, and zero negative comments on mid-summer and end of summer reviews.

I have no problem being told that I didn't measure up performance wise or that my resume didn't stack up in the event of a tie. I do have a problem with getting dicked over without an explanation. I'll have a good laugh in a year when Kirkland is falling all over themselves to lateral in enough people to fill in the gaps in their ranks. Turns out that the solution to overhiring in the past isn't underhiring in the present and future.

143: Agreed. As a no-offer from a NY firm (with my only negative evaluation comments being things like "your first revision of this was just OK...but you improved tremendously later on), I honestly wouldn't have minded to be told "Look, you weren't at the front of a very competitive class in a very competitive year. Sorry." Instead, the only reason proffered for my no-offering (and those of some companions) was...well, basically, the above, with the "but you improved" part truncated. The hell?

I also got the no-offer call tonight from the firm I worked at this summer. Very, very tough because I took my job seriously and I really enjoyed working there. I got good evaluations mid- and end-summer, but obviously it wasn't good enough. I wish I could have gotten a better explanation for why I didn't receive an offer, so I have a better idea of what I need to change. Although it was supposed to be "economy-based", in the end, the firm had to make a choice over who to keep and who not to keep. So in reality, it is performance-based and it hurts.

Heard offer rate at V&E Dallas was low.

145 - what u need to do is go back to ur firm and burn the building down. TTTTTTTake maTTTTTTers inTTTTTO ur own hands. TTTTThaTTTT will show TTTTTThem.

Nixon Peabody NYC - no offers to all of the summers working in transactional - and honestly those summers were the ones who worked the hardest. I feel guilty that all of us in litigation got offers. But I think that only came out to about a 46% offer rate.

Troutman Sanders New York = 2 offers out of 7

115 - got my offer in the mail. best of luck!

Not long ago, this site was flooded with posts from the class of 2009 understandably bemoaning that their offers were being deferred or rescinded as firms came to grips with having made too many offers last summer, given the intervening economic collapse. Now, many firms are being careful not to let that happen again by making fewer offers to this summer’s class, and understandably, those who aren’t getting offers are disappointed. But do you really want firms to make offers that they know they will have to rescind or defer later? Wouldn’t you rather know now that you need to be looking for something else?

Chapman and Cutler LLP gave only 5 out of 9 summers an offer. No reason was given for the lack of offer.

Heard that not everyone in the Kirkland & Ellis LA office got an offer.

Milbank no offered approximately 50% of their summer class. Nothing to do with performance though... Some exceptionally competent people were left high and dry. Go figure...

151:

For the 50% of the summer class that Milbank "offered," the offer was for start dates "sometime" in 2011 with no mention of a stipend.

So some firms are combining different poison pills.

K&E misled their summers and shame on them on hiding behind "performance" as the reason. K&E performance standard = absolute perfection, otherwise one screw-up = no offer, that is unreasonable and unacceptable.

124 -- Quinn's class in LA was fewer than 14 people, not counting the returning 1Ls who already had offers from last year. No-offering "fewer than six" would get you a 61.4% offer rate, on par with Blank Rome in Philadelphia. Sounds like about half to me, but hey, I'm sure the 2Ls appreciate your clarification.

And if you think any of them are for "good cause", you must not have heard anything about what the summers last year got up to.

155 = vocabulary fail

F&R DC office = 0% offers

@10 Hey Dubya - you still here you irrelevant moron?

Hahaha - guess what? I just hiked the 10 year deficit to 9 TRILLION dollars!

See?

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57K4XE20090821

You're a piker compared to me! Don't forget - my party took over Congress in the election of 2006 - this is MY PARTY'S ECONOMY and DON'T YOU FORGET IT! Now go crawl back under your rock in Crawford and disappear - ok asshole?

Anyone know anything about Jenner & Block Chicago?

145 - I would advise you to not beat yourself up over the "performance-based no offer." Yes, the firm had to make a choice over who to keep and who not to keep, but after 5 years of participating in summer programs at my former firm, I can't even begin to tell you the number of random factors that determine whether someone receives an offer and the numerous unfair things that have happened. One summer associate, who was hated by every single associate in the practice group she wanted, got an offer because the senior partner of the group loved her and no one wanted to cross him. One summer associate was disliked by one of the associates because the summer didn't open a door for a female associate (this was at one of the TX offices) and got a bad "social" review based on that. I've seen people who were loved simply because they rooted for the same sports team as a partner and people who did good work that were completely ignored because they just didn't happen to be a partner's best friend. Some partners prefer summers who went to certain schools, automatically assume those summers will always be better, and won't be convinced otherwise. The list goes on and on.

I don't know you so I can't say for sure, but I would bet that your work was just as good, or perhaps better, than the other summers who got offers and those summers were just in a better political situation than you. And what's more, you may not even have had any control over your political situation, especially if other people were liked more based on a random factor like the ones I just described.

No-offered from Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia a couple weeks ago. Not sure on the exact numbers, but a large handful of the 18 got no-offers.

Nixon Peabody DC - no offers to three of eight, which is pretty good b/c we need exactly 0 new associates. Can't wait to see the house-cleaning that happens before the new first-years arrive in (January?).

104 -- 122 here again. That sucks, I'm sorry.
But if it is any consolation, they have so many (allegedly) incoming first years anyway you're probably safer going the boutique/mid-law/small law route. Best of luck.

101 - Fulbright did give offers this week. I don't know what the percentage is, but it is not 100%.

"O'Melveny screwed over a bunch of us I know many at Boalt and Yale did not get offers from O'Melveny. Office I was in was only around 70 percent and was busy as hell with transactional associates billing over the minimum and people in lit all above 2500."

None of this is not true. The only summer no-offered in my office was a train wreck and would have been no-offered in any year.

Also, very few if any people in any group are on track to bust 2500.

I suspect that this is from a disgruntled, summer who was no-offered because 'em enjoyed the summer program a bit too much.

Thanks for playing.

--OMM Midlevel

58 & 62 (mcdermott will & emery).

mcdermott income partner here.

our dc and other offices laid off some good, younger associates (including first-years), and we gently let go of other more senior attorneys. i don't know much about how many offers we plan to extend, but i and others would be particularly disappointed if we extend a single offer of employment in light of management's decision (albeit, aneconomically justifiable one) to layoff newer attorneys.

what is the economic justification for us to bring on board any new associates -- particularly first-year "law clerks" not yet licensed to practice and with no law firm experience -- when we partners (through little fault of our own) can't keep all of the younger worker bees busy?

i know that its a tough market, and i understand and appreciate the argument that members of the class of 2010 want and need jobs too. but, on balance, its hard for me to justify management getting rid of good young attorneys a short while back just to bring on new blood to whom we owe less loyalty.

160: Eat me.

We're in a mess because Bush and the GOP not only gave the financial sector complete free reign (I'm beginning to fear Obama will as well in the name of "bipartisanship"), but also ran insane deficits during a BOOM time. You're supposed to run deficits during down turns (and this is a particularly terrible one), We're in bad position fiscal because we were fittering away during the summer and fall, when we should have been saving. Now it's the darkest winter we've seen since the 1930s. Are we supposed to just starve?

@161. No-offered here from Jenner Chicago. A few others in my class.

It's alright though. Summer class was full of unbearable tools, especially the Michigan people. Dear lord.

167-"None of this is not true" means that it is true. I assume from the content of your post that you meant the opposite?

Wilmer no offered quite a few summers, but suggested that they would have given offers to everyone if everyone were up to par -- par being higher than it has in the past. Wilmer continues to clean out its associate and counsel ranks, sometimes for trivial reasons. The firm has made it abundantly clear that no one should provide tips to ATL or post comments. The clear message is that if caught, you'll be fired. I, however, have already been "transitioned out", so I have nothing to worry about other than feeding my family.

170- do you know what the percentage is?

170-- Did they call or send a letter?

Got my no offer on Thursday from my amLaw 200 firm. I've heard from at least one other classmate that she was also no offered. Not surprised. The call involved a brief mention of some points for improvement covered at my mid review, but clearly it's the economy. My saving grace has been my in-state tuition. Dear Lord, I couldn't imagine being up to my neck in $200K and no biglaw salary.

172, that's BS. Wilmer gave 100% offers, or close to it. We all know who you are and wish you would just shut up already.

What about Proskauer? They seem to fly under the ATL radar. They were thr FIRST (pre-dating Latham) firm to fire first years, and only gave two months severence. They are pushing back the 08 SAs even more. Have they offered any 09s?

What about Proskauer? They seem to fly under the ATL radar. They were thr FIRST (pre-dating Latham) firm to fire first years, and only gave two months severence. They are pushing back the 08 SAs even more. Have they offered any 09s?

What about Proskauer? They seem to fly under the ATL radar. They were thr FIRST (pre-dating Latham) firm to fire first years, and only gave two months severence. They are pushing back the 08 SAs even more. Have they offered any 09s?

@173 - No, I don't.

@174 - Email. Real classy.

-170

176 - as a no-offered Wilmer summer, I can assure you that Wilmer did not give 100% offers.

i heard a rumor that kinky spalding gave offers to all summers who expressed a wilingness to have sex with clients

kinky spalding rocks !

Paul Hastings gave less than 50% offers to its summer class. The report here is incorrect.

kinky spalding is a big democratic firm

they will probably gets lots of work during the obama presidency

they rock !

Everyone re-read 164's comment because it's the most honest assessment of life at a big firm. All of you are smart, hard workers, and have decent potential to do a good job. 90 percent of you aren't fuck ups. But your future is pretty much out of your hands and is based on a series of random factors, including internal firm and client politics. There's no such thing as "merit" at this level. It's just luck.

v-10 Share Partner

er, 162's comment.

See even us olds miss details sometimes

v-10 share P.

162 is dead on. People shouldn't assume that a no-offer is either completely random, or performance-based. There are all sorts of factors that may weigh into the consideration and, unfortunately, the SA may have little or no control over most of them.

For example, a firm might have decided to hire only 50% of its SA class this year. Figure each practice group head has a couple favorites (same alma mater, client history, good looking/doable, etc.). Figure also a couple big cases/deals are going to need to be staffed with first-years familiar with the work. Figure also that diversity must be honored -- ethnic, gender, creed, etc. And so on. Obviously if the firm absolutely has to have you, they'll find a way to keep you. But by and large, they have to trim the numbers and they'll do it for reasons that, to the SA, are arbitrary.

@ 168 McDermott Income Partner

So you're saying because the firm has made reductions in force in the past year, it should now be precluded from making offers to summers who start a year and a half to two years from now? Really? Is that the sort of rigid workforce inflexibility McDermott needs? Like 143 aptly put, “turns out that the solution to overhiring in the past isn't underhiring in the present and future.”

I can't wait to see you undermine the summer reviews of next year's summers, since clearly they shouldn't receive offers because associates were laid off in early 2009.

If you go to UVA and got no-offered, you are probably screwed. Dean Hobson will do nothing for you. It's a great school, but the administration has shamefully allowed his incompetent tenure as head of career services to seriously hurt the careers of many students.

Can anyone confirm the Blank Rome Philadelphia offer numbers?

Anything else on Jenner Chicago offers/no-offers?

Akin Gump NY only offered 13 out of 21 summers.

At least two no-offers and two-offers -- out of six -- at K&L Boston.

160 -

You got nothing on me, Boy. You were a state senator in Illinois when Nino, Clarence, Bill, Sandy, and Tony made me President. I had a surplus when I started, but I promptly turned that into a deficit. I started an unnecessary war in Iraq and borrowed the money from China to pay for it. I'm not surprised that you had to raise the deficit to pay for my economic mess. Stop being so wee wee'd up. The good ole USA is going to be paying for me for a long, long time.

Rumor has it that Wilmer has openings in Wheeling, WV.

Keep in mind that "no offer" doesn't count "cold offer" or other shenanigans.

if you got no offered at Wilmer this summer then you deserved it....seriously...the bar was not set that high.

196--exactly. Cold offers are the first introduction to stealth employment practices of big firms.

And 197, uh, isn't Wilmer one of the pickiest firms out there? I mean if a student is going to be slack, you'd think they would be top ten percent and law review at a top 10 school. The evidence of years of competence against 10 weeks of purported incompetence weighs in the student's favor.

Is anyone really giving cold offers this year? It seems like that might be the better solution for firms that are giving no-offers for economic reasons to avoid saddling otherwise deserving summers with the no-offer stigma, but I haven't heard of any firms going that route.

The high no offer rates at many firms indicated incredible mismanagement and incompetence. To so completely miscalculate your hiring needs to the point where you are forced to no offer HALF of your summers is simply idiotic. It is an incredible waste of resources to bring on SAs at $30k and then no offer half.

Either firms' management are simply idiots when it comes to running a business or the firms screening process is fundamentally broken.

I could understand a 10% no offer rate.... maybe even a 20% no offer rate. But 50%? What the fuck?

Yeah, sure, the economy worsened this past year... but most of the firms with these abysmal offer rates had already conducted lay-offs and had deferred the 2008 summer class start dates. And they did this LAST fall... remember last fall? It was the same time they were making offers to this summer's SA class.

And for those of us that luckily have offers to retunr to these firms, the situation really undermine's one's faith in the management team.

I don't mind biglaw being run in a ruthless manner... hell, that makes sense to me. I DO mind it being run in a ruthless and incompetent manner...

Jenner Chicago hasn't called anyone yet, I have two good friends there.

Can someone explain "cold offer?"

Didn't Akin NY claim that it's reason for rescinding offers and capping the program was that it would allow them to give offers to everyone?

don't i banks and such routinely no offer their interns? in any case, it sucks and it's not what students signed up for, but the reality is that because oci at law schools had been pushed so early, a huge number of offers were already outstanding before lehman collapsed. not sure it's accurate to say it's mismanagement to no-offer 50% of summers if management thinks there won't be enough work to support those summers when they return as associates. as bad as it is to not get an offer, not sure it is better to get an offer, return then get laid off after a few months.

171--Yes, I screwed up and accidentally made it a double negative. None of the quoted text is true. My bad.

--167

when, if ever, do NALP's official numbers about summer associate class offers come out? Does such a list even exist?

203--yep, but then they still no-offered people. Those who got offers were deferred, no mention of a stipend.

172 re Wilmer - so true. Didn't you just love the scathing internal memo meant to scare the living &*^$ out of those who were even thinking about tipping ATL? Apparently it worked, because it didn't end up here (though it should have). I guess the few that were sparred from the bloodbath are shaking in their boots.

I know a few Wilmer summers who didn't get offers.

K&L Gates had at least one no-offer in D.C.

198, you are exacty right. The most ridiculous thing about this process is that one mid-level associate who writes a lukewarm review because they are having a bad day is given more weight by these firms than the opinions of as many as 15-16 law professors that handed you great grades. And, the rest of the firms take the "no offer" as the gospel truth about you. Even better, just wait until your own law school, the one that hired those law professors, starts to back away from you like you have the plague.

198, you are exacty right. The most ridiculous thing about this process is that one mid-level associate who writes a lukewarm review because they are having a bad day is given more weight by these firms than the opinions of as many as 15-16 law professors that handed you great grades. And, the rest of the firms take the "no offer" as the gospel truth about you. Even better, just wait until your own law school, the one that hired those law professors, starts to back away from you like you have the plague.

202: Cold offer = you have an "offer," you can tell people you have an offer, we'll count you as being offered. But don't come. Ever.

Cravath is famous for using these to meet it's 100% offer quota.

JD Chicago has given offers.

194, can you please comment on when the current economy becomes tied to the current President? Thanks.

200: Your facts are wrong. This year's summer associates received their summer offers in August-October 2008. Contrary to your recollection, that was long before firms started laying off associates and deferring/rescinding offers to the class of 2009 -- that really started happening only in January 2009 and later. Firms hired "normal" summer classes last summer/fall because they expected they would have a need for them. Things changed.

101 and 166- Fulbright Houston has not given offers yet, despite rumors in other posts.

192 - Akin NY's offer rate was 15/21. 12 starting in Sep '10, 3 starting in Jan-Mar '11. If any of those offered clerk next year, the clerk's '10 spot will be extended to one of the SAs who didn't get an offer (and the clerk will start in '11).

203/207 - That was never the reason given, though maybe it could be inferred. Akin NY's yield rate for the 2009 SA class was significantly higher than in the past -- by early October, more 2L's had already accepted their SA offers than Akin had anticipated would accept by Nov 1 (despite about the same number of offers being made as last year), so it rescinded the remaining unaccepted offers after giving everyone holding those offers about 3 days' notice of the situation. I don't think anyone was happy about it -- including Akin -- but when you base your offer rate on predicted yield rates (as all law firms -- and law schools -- do) and reality doesn't conform to that predicted rate, there's not much you can do.

@200 " don't mind biglaw being run in a ruthless manner... hell, that makes sense to me. I DO mind it being run in a ruthless and incompetent manner..."

Think of the people in your law school class. Now think, "are these people who have the potential to run multi-national corporations efficiently?" Voila.

There is so much misinformation in this thread... I don't think you can trust a single thing here

With that said, I'm sure there will be blood baths at most of these firms, and that OCI will be the worst it's ever been.

"194, can you please comment on when the current economy becomes tied to the current President? Thanks."

Easy, when it starts doing well.

Ruthless and incompetent management?

LATHAM's ears are burning.

Latham NY laid off more than half the first year class only four months after they started.

Dave Gordon

V&E's Austin office had an offer rate for 2L's of 75% (12/16 received offers). As for Houston, I was told by a reliable source that their offer rate was around 70%, which would make the numbers above very, very wrong. 30/78 is definitely too low. I'd have a slightly easier time buying 40/78.

100 % offer at Black, White & Brown LLP

188 and 200

Questions and Comments from a Senior Associate at V10 firm

-What basis and credentials do you have to categorize biglaw's no-offers as "incredible mismanagement"?

I guess, in your opinion, the rest of the world foresaw the unprecedented downturn in the economy and was adequately prepared to run their businesses the same way during an unprecedented downturn as they did during an unprecedented boom. Like the bankrupt car companies, the failed banks and wall street deal-brokers, the real estate industry, city governments big and small, etc. (which are biglaw clients)

-What industry beyond biglaw has such an impractical recruiting process?

SA offers are given out TWO YEARS before the earliest possible start date.

SA offers are based on 1/3 of the students law school record

Many SAs have never worked a real job, some need handholding, and some are too immature for the biglaw world. The firm can't accurately figure these things out during the mutual BS meetings (i.e., interview process) where the students are on their best behavior and tell the law firm what they think the law firm wants to hear, and the law firm tells the students what the students wants to hear (great work, "its the people", work-life balance, etc.)

Other SA's are card-carrying members of the douche-bag society. In boom times, they would get offers anyway because there weren't enough warm bodies to handle all the work coming in (how do you think the douchebag associates and partners got into the firm).

Wasn't there an earlier discussion about Gen Y's sense of entitlement? Seems that you think SA's should be guaranteed a job?

Its not fair, and it sucks that you will graduate into a recession. But blaming firm mismanagement as the reason that firms are not fullfilling your sense of entitlement is like firms telling good associates that they are being let go because of performance rather than the truth - which is there isn't enough work for the associates already at the firm.

2011 = lost class

The firms deferring will just not hire, so that they can absorb their backlog.

You guys are screwed, good luck.

From a strictly academic perspective, wouldn't it be interesting if a firm told it's summers that they were all qualified, but they only had room for 60%. Then, told them to submit the lowest amount of salary that they would accept and took the lowest 60% of the group?

How low would you go to have a job in this economy?

225: you misread my post.

I was not saying SAs are entitled to anything.
"But blaming firm mismanagement as the reason that firms are not fullfilling your sense of entitlement is like firms telling good associates that they are being let go because of performance rather than the truth - which is there isn't enough work for the associates already at the firm." I did not say that.

I was merely pointing out that a 50% offer rate is absurd and is indicative of a screw up in recruiting. If there was no work, the fims should have hired fewer people. And the firms should have been more cautious. Why?

Because the firms had an indication of the weakness in the economy last fall. Many had already begun deferring SA associates from the 2008 SA class. Many of those same firms had already conducted layoffs... others conducted layoffs later in the fall.

Frankly, as a mid-level, I am surprised you don't agree with me. Doesn't it piss you off that your firm wasted over 1 million dollars on SAs it would never be able to absorb?

I am just saying that the firms need to recognize that they screwed up their forecasts big time and need to take steps to fix the problem beyond addressing the immediate concern of no-offering people.

As for my credentials? I know a hell of a lot more about running a business than some mid-level who most likely went straight from undergrad to law school.

NYC to 250K!!!

This situation is not unique. When the tech bubble burst and the nasdaq crashed in 2000, a number of firms that focused on dot-com clients went belly-up, many smaller offices of IP boutiques closed, the rate of SA no-offers went up, and I recall at least one V100 firm in Austin, TX deferring its incoming first years into oblivion.

The associates survived and eventually found jobs - though not necessarily in big-law. The difference now is that the problem is more widespread, whereas in 2000 the IP firms were hardest hit.

172, 208 re Wilmer: So let me get this straight, the fucks at Wilmer had an internal memo to scare those who were even thinking about tipping ATL or post comments? What a bunch of spineless motherfuckers!

at least some no offers at Crowell & Moring. Not sure of the percentage, but the DC class size was about double what was expected, I believe, so my guess is it is more than one or two.

Amen, @225.

Firm mismanagement for a 50% offer rate? If the firm has enough chits to cover the PR and future recruiting blow, they could decide to take the risk that the downturn would be much less than what actually happened, and they wanted to have a healthy and large SA crop at their disposal. Other more conservative firms with much smaller classes might have less doc reviewers for the big deals all the corporate groups were praying would materialize. So, these firms perhaps saw the worst case scenario that they would have their pick of the litter (however they decide to determine the top SAs--left-handers, stayed late on Saturdays, went to their alma mater).

I'm not defending them...but it might not have been mismanagement.

216 - Fulbright Dallas has though.

what's up with mcdermott? any SAs hear anything or have any idea of when they can expect to hear something?

142 is full of shit.

I was laid off from biglaw as a first year, and now work in small law.

I've seen the cases, and interacted with the partners and associates at both kind of firms.

Small law fucking blows, and getting shut out of biglaw is as bad as you think. My small law boss is a 'tard and the cases are shit.

We are all fucked. I recommend getting out of this shithole profession. Everyone would be better off if your talent were used in some productive way instead of on the inane crap that awaits you in small law.

And 142, seriously, fuck you. We all know that most lawyers are fucked due to oversupply. Your bar class example is bullshit and you should know it.

Does anybody know when V&E plans on confirming start dates?

228 - pick your poison

Should a firm reneg on its SA offers to the 2009 SA class because "indications" of a bad economy were supposedly known "in the fall" of 2008?

Or should the firm keep honor its SA offers made "in the fall" of 2008 for the 2009 SA class, and then see what the economy actually does over the next year and make offers for the 2010 associate class that it thinks it can sustain.

238: firms should have made fewer offers.

Yes, that would have been rough for those interviewing, but it would have made a hell of a lot more financial sense for the firms.

This is especially true for large law firms which, unlike most other large businesses, do not maintain cash reserves. When you are running on debt year to year, you need to be extra cautious... and the indications last summer were not particularly rosy...

231: Yes - as a Wilmer associate that is lucky to still have a job - I've got to admit that the memo scared me - and most of my circle at the firm - enough to dissuade us from even mentioning ATL around the firm...much less read it on the firm network. Rumor has it that at least one associate that was suspected of tipping ATL was promptly fired...though I imagine the firm would say it was for reasons unrelated to his tip. One of the unfortunate souls caught in the "transition" group really should forward the memo to ATL. I, admittedly, am too scared to do so.

Cold offer? I've got a hot offer for you... right... here....

Thank you, 162 and 185.

239:

I dont know about all firms, but the 2009 SA class at my firm was about half of what it was in previous years. So the firm did adjust its expectations based on future projections of a downturn...the length of the SA summer was shortened, and the events were cut way back. This is proof that the firm did not mismanage the recruiting process as alleged.

How close was the firm in getting it perfect? I don't know how many SA's got offers, and only time will tell.

See 233's comment which is likely accurate as well.

225

Fenwick offered less than 1/2 the class and "waitlisted" a few.

Fenwick & West offered less than 1/2 the class and "waitlisted" a few.

Latham said no layoffs in the beginning of '08, then shit hit the fan and they had to adjust the next year. It wasn't a guarantee that there would never be layoffs. Just none in the plans given the situation at that time.

Latham fell in Vault rankings. That doesn't mean they'll lose business, since clients don't look at Vault exclusively to choose a law firm. They look at Chambers or have existing relationships/word of mouth. They could give less than 2 shits if Latham had ever laid people off. Vault is for law school kids that are clueless about how law firm life works anyways.

Latham's LA office gave offers to 90% of its summer class. This is verified. Not sure about other offices. They also said as of now they are eyeing fall start dates. Obviously these are not guarantees, but in this economy it puts them near the top as far as offer rate and non-deferral. We will see when the time comes, but until then why comment when you don't know.

Latham haters need to calm down. They are still an elite firm and will continue to be so. Just because management may have botched hiring and personnel decisions does not mean that all of the sudden the human capital and top law students who have matured into fantastic lawyers (associates and partners) are not still there providing valuable services for their clients. Sure, they were not prepared for the single worst recession of this century other than the great depression. But they came out and admitted their mistake (giving a huge 6 months severance in the process), and would be stupid to not try to ensure it doesn't happen again. All of the laid off first years in the LA office found work afterwards, and had a nice 80-100k in the bank as well. I am time and time again amazed at how stupid most of the posters on this site are, and also how insecure they must be to have to repeatedly troll about a firm that they probably never worked for and couldn't have gotten a job offer at in the heyday/good years. Stop hating.

227 - and to make it more interesting, a dutch auction. So everyone gets the clearing salary even if they bid below it.

Ok...I'm sick and tired of reading that the reason why people were no offered is because of "the economy," politics, etc. Sure, this year was rougher than others. However, it's time to take a good look in the mirror folks. Despite your unquestionable competence, is it possible that you were no offered because or your lack of social skills and grace? Being a good lawyer is about more than writing an impeccably well researched memo. This is an inherently social profession, people. If you are a pain in the ass to work with, or are an ass all around, it shouldn't come as a surprise that you won't get an offer. Lawyers at large law firms spend a good amount of time at work. They want to spend it with NORMAL (as opposed to WIERD) people Perhaps it's time that many of you learn how to gracefully interact with others, and that you stop blaming anybody but yourselves for not receiving an offer.

Questions for Milbank No-Offers: when did you find out? what groups did you rotate through? How do you know that it is 50%?

I find 50% hard to believe (20-30% most likely).

So many people suggest forgetting biglaw and opting for a small firm or boutique instead, as if those little guys are just snapping up talent left and right. Even the little firms that are booming are not under any circumstances going to hire enough new associates to absorb all the biglaw rejects. Bottom line is there is an astronomical supply/demand imbalance.

248 - that's right! Obviously this year's summer class has a much higher number of socially awkward people than previous classes! It's not the economy, it's social skills!

Did DLA make any offers yet?

249 -- I know it's hard to believe, but the 50% number is accurate. Milbank let us know last week via phone. I was no offered and rotated through (i) Project Finance, (ii) Global Finance, and (iii) Trust & Estates.

246

Latham NY laid off more than half the first year class only four months after they started. Before this the first years were reassured by both Dave Gordon and then Bob Dell at first year academy that "there was a place for them at Latham & Watkins." This isn't even counting the "no layoffs" promise and the numerous partners and senior associates who assured them that Latham "would never lay off first years."

Latham NY also laid off half the second years, a third of the third years, and numerous associates of other years. In total, about 45% of associates at Latham NY were laid off in 2009.

If that's not disgusting enough for you, Latham NY canned 3 of the 4 first years who failed the bar. The one they didn't lay off is the son of a powerful partner in one of the foreign offices.

Now, tell me how much a "guaranteed" start date means at Latham when Latham has already broken numerous promises and guarantees.

Don't think Latham's problems are limited to the NY office. Latham LA laid off a third of the first years only 4 months after they started, and Latham DC laid off 25% of first years only four months after they started.

There is a reason the firm dropped to 17, and will likely free fall in the rankings for the next few years.

Did somebody say NORML? Legalise!!

200--you are wrong as someone else pointed out. No one expected this tsunami when summer offers were given in Aug-Oct 08. As a partner at a large firm I will freely admit we screwed up because we have never experienced this before. But we have many new associates coming in and we have avoided layoffs. So, unfortunately summers will suffer. Do I feel bad about it? Of course, but if we do our normal % we would have to do layoffs--and we won't do that. So, we will be about 50% and will freely admit it is the economy because it is. Most who will not get offered would have received offers in any other year and we will say that. Doesn't make them feel any better but it is the truth and sad economic reality. And yes if it makes you feel any better PPP will be down.

When firms mass fire juniors and/or mass no offer summers, the managing partners should automatically be kicked the fuck out.

I'm sick of incompetent managers getting a pass while the baby lawyers suffer.

251 - you're right, there were probably just as many wierdos this year as in others. The economy just makes it easier for the firms to weed out the wierdos. I still think it's funny how those who didn't receive offers blame everyone and everything but themselves. It was a competition this summer and some people, inevitably, were going to be no offered. That's not to say, however, that there aren't reasons why some people received offers over others. Blaming "the economy" and all the scapegoats that people are blaming is simply a means for people to feel better about themselves....

251 - you're right, there were probably just as many wierdos this year as in others. The economy just makes it easier for the firms to weed out the wierdos. I still think it's funny how those who didn't receive offers blame everyone and everything but themselves. It was a competition this summer and some people, inevitably, were going to be no offered. That's not to say, however, that there aren't reasons why some people received offers over others. Blaming "the economy" and all the scapegoats that people are blaming is simply a means for people to feel better about themselves....

256

Commit suicide

First, let me say I think this situation is truly sad. As a mid-level, I keep thinking back to myself as a law student/summer, and I'm not sure whether I would have had the chops to "shine" brighter than my classmates and win myself an offer. I was smart and hardworking, granted, but maybe a little clueless. I am truly grateful to have graduated when I did.

With that in mind, a small tip for 2Ls, and 3Ls looking to re-interview. And I mean this in the nicest way possible:

Don't be an idiot.

I'm at a firm that happens to be fairing well right now. Our OCI schedule is unexpectedly overflowing, with students literally pounding down our doors to get an interview --- ok, ok, not literally, let's say "stopping by the hospitality suite" and dropping off resumes.

For whatever its worth here is my little tidbit of wisdom about OCI interviewing. Whenever you talk to someone at a law firm, treat every conversation like its an interview. Because guess what? It is!

Yes, we actually remember meeting you. Yes, if you make a great impression, we will suggest you get a callback. Yes, if you make a bad impression, we will pass that along as well.

I was manning our “hospitality” suite during a recent OCI. Every time someone stopped by our suite to drop off a resume, I asked them at least 2-3 of the questions I would have asked in a formal interview. Some of the students gave great answers. One person was so impressive that I spoke to the recruiting people to make sure we got that person an interview. But the rest of the people stopping by just to "drop off" their resume? I guess they didn’t think that the attorneys in the suit had any pull. Um, why do you think we’re there? I was interviewing you, dummy!! Why make a decision based on a cold piece of paper when I can look you in the eye and try to see what you're like?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not offended. Not in the slightest. I have too many other things going on in my life to be concerned about it. I just feel bad for these kids that are desperately going through the interview process. Some of them looked so clueless I just wanted to shake them. So, consider yourself shaken.

Even though this is slightly off the topic of the post, I certainly hope its helpful. Then again, if I need to explain this to you, maybe I don’t want you working at my firm. Never mind.

Offers from Hogan DC are out.

246 - Sell your shit somewhere else, you stupid HR person. Only few laid off associates found jobs. You can stick your severance up your ass. Most associates left are crap (at least in NY office) and are there cause they are the best suckups. Most of them are from shitty schools and are literally too dumb to do the job.

Clients select firms based on reputation - latham reputation is falling and during beauty contests latham will not win as many cases as before. Clients do look what school people went to also, so shitty people latham will be able to hire from now on will not impress clients. Clients hire firms based on reputation so they can cover their asses or based on cost efficiency - neither of which latham can deliver. Latham NY has no real clients - just banks who hire many different firms and can switch to another firm with ease. Lehman and Bear are no longer and latham was not able to pick up jp morgan and barclays. Latham will go back to being an LA firm where it has real clients. Dave Gordon - go back to surfing in San Diego, you fake fuck.

Also, every laid off associate, total of 500, will do their best to fuck latham any way they can. That's a lot of enemies. And good people remaining at latham will leave when they get a chance. I would have never went to latham if it was ranked 17.

Latham hires a lot of pretty, dumb women.

I hope Latham's clients enjoy paying Latham rates for a pretty face.

any word on kirkland la offer rates?

@589/259 - My 1L classes had a mandatory curve, so plenty of students (umm, half?) were in the bottom of the class and, when you chatted in the bars after grades came out, too few took any personal responsibility. Too many claimed it was this or that of the prof.

251: To echo what others have said, obviously the bar was higher this year. But that doesn't mean the firms put names into a hat and drew the ones that would get an offer, either. As with layoffs, there's no such thing as an entirely non-merit-based no-offer (unless the firm offered no one, folded, or only gave offers to partners' children).

The fact is that the ECONOMY is more competitive. You should adjust your work habits and/or expecations for success accordingly.

256: absolutely fair.

and of course you should no offer SAs before you conduct layoffs for a whole host of obvious reasons.

I am just pointing out that many firms bungled their strategy to handle the downturn and that saying that this year's economic situation was unforeseeable last September is incorrect.

Sounds like we agree, for the most part...

I know plenty of current and former Latham associates who weren't laid off who FUCKING HATE LATHAM now.

Many associates at Latham NY want to leave because the place has become so horrible, and will once opportunities become available again.

Did Dave Gordon bomb the LSAT? Why did he go to Syracuse law school after going to Cornell UG?

Why aren't any honors listed next to his TTT degree on his Latham profile? Did Dave Gordon not earn any honors at Syracuse Law School?

268-I am not sure I agree that it was clear in Sept. First, we actually were quite busy then. Second,we didn't actually hit the wall until Nov. Maybe we should have have seen it coming but we didn't and we sure didn't see the length of it. But by then (Nov) it was too late. And, we are sticking by no layoffs. Oh and 260 I will not commit suicide. I like my practice and my firm. Just wish we were busier.

Oh and also my life. We do not work NY hours (nor do we get NY comp) but we actually have lives. I coached my kids sports teams and rarely missed a game. There are practices and lives outside of NY, DC and the WC.

To all the people who discuss Latham and their generous severance packages:

There is a cause of action that can be brought against an employer for laying off someone within the first year of employement. Its called promissory estoppell. Even though the job is at-will, there is a reasonable expectation that a person who takes a new job will be employed for a year (unless they are fired for good cause). I litigated a case with similar facts to those described by 246. The hurdle, here, would be to prove that the laid-off lost some gave-up an alternative employment opportunity by relying on what Latham said during the recruiting process (and thereafter). The likely damages would be 1 year's worth of salary and benefits of the alternative employment opportunity less what the first yeat Lathamites collected during their Latham employment.

No law firm would want those facts to go in front of a jury. Consider the generous package for what it was - a litigation avoidance measure.

Kirkland no-offeree; called my senior associate after no-offer, who I was friends with. He told me layoffs started that same day (last Friday). Kirkland has basically waited until now (Aug-Oct '09) to start bringing the pain.

I'm biased because I got an offer but at least in its SF office KE seems well-managed: they hired half the summers as in years past, very solid people (with a very few interesting exceptions, i.e. one TTT nontrad psychopath), gave them a lot of quality work, all but eliminated events, were basically upfront at least insofar as not making false promises, and then gave offers to most (all? not sure) of them. And that makes me feel pretty good about going to work there.

Course no one's mentioned start dates. Any info out there? I'm praying for Cravath-style paid deferral (JAMAICA BAHAMA COOOOOME ON PRETTY MAMA...) but that's just me being selfish since I know some of the others JUST CAN'T WAIT to begin their LIFE OF TOIL.

Please, consider this thread when considering your friends who were no offered or cold offered LAST summer.

I was no offered last summer by a firm with a lot of financial problems last year and I still think some of my peers feel I deserved this no offer (perhaps the only thing I did to deserve it was split... there were only 2 no offers at my office and we both split). So, if you know someone who got no offered last summer give him/her a hug. That is all.

210 + 211:

What in Gods name gave you the idea that a law professor who anonymously graded you and 160 other students on superficial "issue spotting" has any clue whatsoever what your particular law firm needs and wants. The professor is not going to be working beside you everyday and have his/her career measured in part by the good or shoddy work that you do on his/her case.

274, that's pure shit. Kirkland hasn't finished associate reviews yet. NSPs are after that. Might be some stealth layoffs after that, but there's no way in hell they happened Friday.

IM SO TIRED OF YOU JACKASSES BRINGING UP LATHAM!!!! KILL YOURSELVES!!!!!

279

Shut the fuck up Bob Dell

0% is ridiculous.

Someone should burn down these law firms.

anyone know what stb did in its palo alto office?

What happened at Nixon Peabody Boston?

the legal system isn't working for us. let's tear these law firms down and do things to the partners.

285

violent, sexual things?

FIRST to say that the shark has been jumped in this post. See, e.g., 286.

284 - not sure of the numbers, but there were definitely no-offers.

I want to FUCK these partners in the mouth

- gross old man

278, 274 here. He said they started on Friday. He said they'll be slow (i.e. stealthy) and it'll occur gradually over the next couple of months. But its started. The next couple of months are going to be a bit of housecleaning.

289

Why not in the asshole also, gross old man?

261- well said.

ATTENTION FUCKED OVER BABY LAWYERS:

We need to go back to the country's violent roots and fuck these partners up.

We're gonna kill the partners but pay my severance first.

I got an offer from Thelen. The other 3 SA's did to.

143: ditto

hughes hubbard ny gave 100% offers, said it expects on time start date.

297

LOL

they rescission pwned some 08 grads

Hey, 295, did that cunt whose name rhymes with the band that features Eddie and Alex give you the Thelen offer? Cause that's not an offer of employment, it's an offer to slam some ass.

298 - go on...

300th!!!!

Love the people on the comments who think it was "mismanagement" to no offer summers, but can't admit that it was also mismanagement to hire them in the first place.

HMM--let's see you all went to law school because you thought it would make you rich. After all, that's why you are interviewing the Lathams and Kirklands. And you are upset because those partners want to still make gobs of money which you hanker for but your timing (through no fault of your own) is bad. But if you did wind up there and made partner you would do the same thing. After all that's why you are interviewing the Lathams and Kirklands. Sorry just because you went to a good law school you are not guaranteed gobs of money no matter how much you might rage at the unfairness of the BIGLAW firms. If you hate them so much--don't interview with them.

303

Is it too much to ask that they not be managed incompetently?

It's not like the laid offs/no offereds can go back and remove Latham/Kirkland from their interview schedules. Back then these places weren't the rank toilets they are today.

302: I love the people in this thread that don't read.

The mismanagement comment specifically referred to over-hiring for the summer programs.

302: I love the people in this thread that don't read.

The mismanagement comment specifically referred to over-hiring for the summer programs.

299

I dont know what you mean? Is that a van Halen reference? I was definately offered at Thelen. Three guys were as well. The four of us will start in Aug '10. I dont know if I will take it though. One of the partners was kind of hitting on me at the bar.

295

240. The memo was not that "scary." It just emphasized the importance of loyalty and professionalism at the firm. Obviously management felt betrayed by the leaks, and if you think about it, what firm wouldn't want/expect its employees to act in a loyal and protective way toward the hand that feeds them?

253: wow. I had no idea it was going to be that brutal.

308

They shouldn't have anything to hide.

Let's K&L Gate some partners

185/186 is right - it's all random, from getting hired to making partner (or not).

And for those on the wrong side of the office politics, find a new office. You can do bad work for someone as a second year associate and they will forget. If you piss them off or they simply take a dislike to you, not only will they never forget, they'll tell the world. You will never live it down. You can only leave it behind.

Oh give me a freaking break 308. The WH PR team is at it again. The memo was a very forward way of tarring and feathering those who talked to above the law, and of shaming and threatening anyone who was considering doing so in the future. And firm loyalty?? Seriously?? Scores of WH associates who received bonuses, raises and pats on the back were fired for "performance reasons" three or four months later. If you want to talk about loyalty, we need to turn the tables...It's not the associates that got shit on that were disloyal. The firm should be prepared to reap what it sows.

Oh give me a freaking break 308. The WH PR team is at it again. The memo was a very forward way of tarring and feathering those who talked to above the law, and of shaming and threatening anyone who was considering doing so in the future. And firm loyalty?? Seriously?? Scores of WH associates who received bonuses, raises and pats on the back were fired for "performance reasons" three or four months later. If you want to talk about loyalty, we need to turn the tables...It's not the associates that got shit on that were disloyal. The firm should be prepared to reap what it sows.

308: 240 is right, the Wilmer memo was scary. It came from the managing partners and it said don't ever do that again. I don't check ATL at work anymore. I've heard a number of partners complain about the ATL postings. There was even talk of trying to determine who sent in the tips earlier this year. I too heard that an associate in Boston was fired and escorted out of the building in 20 minutes after it was learned that he sent the meeting minutes to ATL. What is most surprising to me is the partnership's lack of confidence in the firm, so much that they are continually worried about ATL posts. Hopefully no one is basing career decisions on such things - and if they are, they're idiots.

Baker Botts NY only gave 1 offer out of 8 summers

No one should be surprised by the Wilmer partners' actions with regard to ATL. They base their firing and promotion decisions on internal politics and rumors. There are so many good lawyers at the firm that they have to weed them out somehow, so the do it based on "so and so said that associate up for partner did a poor job on a memo as a first year associate" or "I heard that associate is a bitch" or "that associate is great, he's a red sox fan."

@316 - that one summer is gonna be lonely when he starts as an associate in January 2012.

Lat, Kash and Elie - Why don't you do an open thread on Wilmer scare tactics so the whole story can come out? No one is going to send in tips. Just make sure you leave it open long enough for the Wilmer people to go home and comment since everyone is too scared to comment at work.

319

Brilliant. But yeah, most associates are scared shitless - so who knows how many will actually say anything. I totally second 240. Memo was frightening as hell.

316- Can that be right? How does that compare to what other BigTex firms did in their NYC offices? E.g., F&J, VE, Akin Gump?

278 is under the false impression kirkland can only schedule layoffs as part of its formal review process. false assumption. if kirkland is laying off they can do so outside that ordinary review process. these are not ordinary times. know at least one laid off lawyer left friday.

How can Wilmer think that scaring associates shitless is going to improve loyalty to the firm? Morale has been low since at least the beginning of the year in the office I'm in. Most seem to agree that the atmosphere has completely changed, and it's not about a lack of work, because at least in litigation and securities there is more than enough. Cutting upward evaluations (likely forever) did not help because that is the one way associates feel like they can get back at the partners who are mean and reward those who are great. If the firm wants loyalty they should improve morale, not threaten us. I can't imagine the Johnson School of Management taught our managing partner to threaten employees into submission.

321: V&E NY supposedly clocked in at 100% offers. Not sure about the others.

Dubya - the voters no-offered you in 2000 -- how come you still became President?

323: Perhaps the threats didn't do much for morale - but one thing is for sure. It shut people up. Quickly. Since no one had the balls to press the forward button when the threat memo went out - obviously the memo had the desired effect. Threat of losing job in this economy = silence.

321 - No word on F&J in NYC. News is supposed to come out this week.

295: 100% offers at Heller Ehrman.

325: it was a cold offer, and he failed to recognize that fact and showed up anyway.

315 - Congratulations! You are governed by a bunch of pricks. Let's take it for what it is: a moral declaration of bankruptcy. What a bunch of Stalinist motherfuckers.

319 is correct. We need to see a thread on Wilmer scare tactics by Monday. Where are we? North Korea?

331 and 319 - a good idea, but it might not work. The fear at the firm among the babies is tangible. I know the person who was escorted out of Wilmer. He was accused by the firm of something unrelated to ATL, but it as widely rumored that he was the one that passed the memo on, and that got back to management. This is serious shit, and people are afraid for their jobs.

Is it better to have summered and lost than to have never summered at all?

248 you are so full of shit they need a new word for it. Being an asshole is part and parcel of many, many people who succeed in a firm. Being somewhat of an outlier of the generic masses makes someone dead meat.

You sir (or madam) are an absolute asshole.

333 - depends on the amound of sex involved.

332 - it might work if everyone posts their thoughts on Wilmer from home and then denies it at work. I heard the Boston guy bragged about posting the memo. Dumbass. The firm can't possibly know who is posting at home. The reason the partners fear it is because they don't understand why associates post anything to ATL - they stupidly think associates have as much stake in the firm as they do, yet they give us no reason to be loyal. Their efforts to develop loyalty and increase morale are completely misguided - for example, who is the marketing genius who thought InSite would make us all feel like a tightnit community? More like, why is the firm paying some marketing idiot money to post stories to the internal website while firing associates.

One of our summers did not get an offer because a firm proofreader/editor said his writing was simply hideous. Bad bad.

331 - More like Russia - they pretend it's a great place ruled by men who are compassionate and fair, but if you cross them they take you down without a second thought, thereby sending a message to everyone else not to speak up.

I got a ding from WilmerHale after OCIs. Going in they were one of my top choices, I thought my interview went really well, and I was disappointed by the rejection e-mail. But after reading this thread I'm kind of glad - it doesn't seem like the intellectually open place it purports to be. Am I wrong about that?

If a firm wants to seal leaks, there are a few ways to do that - it can encourage people to shut up without threatening, which to me seems like a last resort.

The delay/discontinuation of upward reviews is disheartening. I hope you guys get them back.

so what exactly are the offer rates? doesnt nalp publish those?

70, what did Fried Frank NY do?

277. Then I guess law school grades don't matter and does not necessarily reflect a person's merit? Right? I mean, who knew firms could ignore the GPA limits and just hire those guys with a firm handshake and good grasp of gulf.

339- theres an easy way. mark the communication confidential. easy as that.

nalp won't publish till february i believe. check the ATL archives

321: that number is correct and i have no idea how the other bigtex firms in NY did.

342--GPA's are relevant to a point. But, the difference between a 3.8 and a 3.6 is irrelevant. At that point you look for other things. And, being good at gulf as you out it or even golf is also irrelevant. But common sense, an ability to relate to clients and also to work well in teams are important.

342--GPA's are relevant to a point. But, the difference between a 3.8 and a 3.6 is irrelevant. At that point you look for other things. And, being good at gulf as you put it or even golf is also irrelevant. But common sense, an ability to relate to clients and also to work well in teams are important.

"Our culture is a distinctly collegial one in which all lawyers and staff are treated with respect." http://www.wilmerhalecareers.com/investing_in_your_future/
Any questions?

#217, who are you?

Doesn't a 50% offer rate actually make more sense in the scheme of things than a 90% or 100%? Its been an absurd system for years, accepting even incompetent law students simply because you gave them a Summer offer based on their interviews + grades. At 50%, lawfirms can actually choose the students who performed well, or were otherwise quite impressive, and let go of those who struggled. I'm a 3L with an offer from a firm that gave 100% offers, and some Summers did NOT deserve offers, so our rates SHOULD have been 70-80% in a reasonable world. Even if the economy rebounds, I think firms SHOULD overhire for their Summer classes so they can then be discerning in their full-time offers. An intelligently designed system could arise from this.

@348 - Yeah, does it say which Wilmer office it's referring to? PA maybe? For sure not the NYO.

348: Along those same lines...."DPRK is a single-united-party constitutional democracy guaranteeing freedom of speech and assembly to all citizens."

http://www.korea-dpr.com/biography.htm

352 - Seems definitely to be a better place than Wilmer: "Today The D.P.R.K. is a genuine worker's state where all the people are completely liberated from the exploitation and oppression. The workers, peasants, soldiers and intellectuals are the real owners of the power and defend their interests."

http://www.korea-dpr.com/politics.htm

Anyone looked at how busy Latham is? Was the layoff sufficient to keep people busy now, or do they still have nothing to do?

348 -- same page: " (...) we spend the time to think about (...) how we can make this law firm a better place to be." Fraser Hunter, Partner, Litigation and Securities New York

355- Maybe Fraser should take a page from the DPRK - sounds like they're having more success at making it a better place than Fraser and his thinking.

It has become very tiring to listen to a laid off Latham associate rant. When the layoffs happened I did sympathize with them, but now it is plain that these kids with an obscene sense of self entitlement need to get over themselves. You are not the only person in the world who is suffering as a result of the economic malaise. It is your choice to hate Latham, but making a public exhibition of your venom only reflects badly on you. This thread is about summer associates who did not get offered. At least you started at a big law firm and collected a severance large enough to take care of your immediate student loan worries. The summer associates who did not get offered are facing a very long and scary nine months as they scramble to get a job while studying for an academic qualification that the market tells them is worth less than the debt they took on to get it. You, the laid off Latham associates, have the luxury of waiting, hating and looking. The puppies that have been left out in the cold this summer recruiting season are likely to be screwed even before their lives properly begin. They will have to carry the weight of shame at not being offered for the rest of their lives. Who will these kids hate? At least you have Latham to comfort you and bolster your flagging ego. So give it a rest huh?

What about Andrews Kurth and Haynes and Boone? Have they announced? Offer rates?

357, stop trying to divide the people who got fucked by law firms.

it's not a contest to see who got screwed the worst. latham's an asshole for laying off all those first years, and the firms that no offer large number of people like Fish & Richardson, Milbank, etc, are also assholes. We can't let the assholes get us fighting each other. They're the ones we should hate.

357/359 - Don't worry, Fraser of Wilmer will think of a way to make it all better.

249:

Only the bankruptcy group at Milbank was allowed to pick people for offers.

Everybody else was offered or dinged by the executive committee, for reasons that were obvious and had nothing to do with performance.

249,

No offense, but of course you were no-offered....it doesn't take a genius to know that you needed to get into litigation or bankruptcy or get no-offered. I hope you find your way. I have a good friend who made the same mistake and is now without employment.

Scalia no offered innocent people sentenced to death.

Scalia no offered innocent people sentenced to death.

HIRING ALERT: The Justice Department is hiring new attorneys to defend Eric Holder's friends in the Black Panthers.

Sorry, I meant 253.

362.

104/122: Goodwin was pretty damn fair about who it offered and no offered. If you showed up at 9:45 AM and left by 5 PM everyday (and took hour and a half lunches 4 days a week) - you didn't get an offer. If you complained a lot about having to do "actual work" and talked down to your superiors - you didn't get an offer. If you worked hard, you got an offer even if some people thought you were kind of weird and your first drafts sucked. From what I've seen about how got offers and who didn't was that people who performed or made an honest effort at performing to minimum standards got an offer. If you couldn't or wouldn't perform - then yes, it was performance based and you didn't deserve to be there anymore. People have this perception that just because they got a SA gig they deserve an offer and that's just not reality anymore, and never should have been the reality. This can be a wake up call to those who don't want to work, who don't take pride in their work product or care to show respect for the people they work with. It's a very unfortunate situation for those people, but it was necessary and one day you will be grateful it happened if you actually learn from it.

362:

Not everybody got into the bankruptcy group. And if you think that lit offers were made based on merit, I've got a bridge to sell you.

It's natural to initially react to a no offer or being laid off as a junior associate with some degree of hostility and ask "why me". I've been there as a laid off senior associate and while I didn't have the law school debt, having 2 young kids and a mortgage isn't the ideal place to be either. That said, get over it. You're not helping yourself. Instead of asking "why me" start asking "what am I going to do about this". Doubtful you can find a clerkship in this economy but you're young enough to hang a shingle or work for small law on some contingency basis. What do you have to loose. I mortgaged my house and am doing ok at times, better at times and sometimes just surviving. Even though I went through a year of hell, I can honestly say I have never been happier -- having control over your success and failure is worth infinitely more than a top 10 pedigree or a law review. So take a couple of weeks or months off...drink yourself to a stupor and then wake up and start to rebuild.

369

your post is depressing

359, the former Latham associates have no business spewing their now putrid vile all over this thread. At least they started and collected enough money to transition into anything else that they may fancy. The kids who have not been offered a position cannot actually blame the law firms they summered at because it could very well have been a performance issue, as it invariably was in former years, or it might have been the economy. But that is not the point because other people were offered jobs and they were not. The conclusion that anyone would draw is that there is something wrong with these rejects. The worst part of is that everyone knows that they have not been offered a position. This is something that they will have to live with for the rest of their lives.

357

Latham is no longer a top 10 law firm

The ranting of no offerees is pathetic. GET OVER IT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! Apply to other jobs; hang a shingle and start your own damn firm; explore alternative career options, do anything! The one thing that won't improve your employment prospects is feeling sorry for yourself!

On another note, nothing wrong with applying to clerkships. But way too many people think of clerkships as a "back up" option. Folks, if you couldn't get an offer when you, at worst, stood a 50% chance of getting one, your chances of landing a clerkship are slim to none.....don't put all your eggs in the clerkship basket.

Some of the firms with high offer rates, 90+%, could very easily bring everyone in and after the first year trim the fat and cut half of them.

If you thought this summer was competitive, the first year (even if it starts in 2011 or 2012) is going to have more backstabbing than America's Next Top Model.

The sense of entitlement is just incredible here. Face it, you wanted big dollars and now aren't getting it. Nothing noble here. Since when did any business carry people when they can't afford them on the payroll. Only law firms get criticized for making business decisions because a bunch of liberal arts majors who have been coddled all their lives now realize they might have to figure out how to make the big bucks--which is obviously their goal or they wouldn't be whining about BIGLAW. Just because you went to a good school doesn't entitle you to anything. Sorry folks.

I heard 0% offers at Heller Ehrman and Thelen.

To quote the immortal words of Apollo Creed in Rocky III, "THERE IS NO TOMORROW" (for law students).

Summers who worked your ass off and will continue to do so.... congratulations, you have earned the right to be an indentured servant to asshole rich banker clients and the asshole partners that service them. keep working hard stupid monkeys, after a few years, the firm will show you the door too. your chances of making partner are nealy zero and in the new economy exit opps are not what they used to be. should have been a plumber, or any profession that is actually useful and adds net value to society.

378

Joe the Plumber to 190!!!!

mcguire woods chicago hasnt told it's summers jacksh*t. dont know about oother offices

375 - sounds like someone is a little bitter because they couldn't get a summer in Biglaw because, despite what you're been telling yourself, it really does matter what school you're at.

Latham's preference is to bring in the whole class + additional 3L hires, hand out little work, then fire over half the class before they have any written evaluations.

That's the Latham way. I wonder why Latham fell 10 spots to V17

361 -

what obvious reasons?

379, Joe the Plumber to 80k, no student loans, job security, and reasonalbe hours. really, not a bad deal. we will continue to slave away for our corporate masters, with 200k in student loan debt, no job security, and get fat and pasty white sitting at our desks until they fire us.... but we have prestige!

378 - you almost persuaded me to take the high road rather than that $160k . . . almost. Laughing at you Joe!

322, which Kirkland office and which Kirkland practice?

Let's all kill ourselves

385, it's not about the high road. It's about that Joe actually has a better deal than you. You'll figure that out in a few years.

I need someone to assist me. My name is Richard and I am a unionized mason. I have no college education. I worked hard to save enough money to send my son, Allan, to college and then law school. My son assures me that I spent my hard earned money on a fine and prestigious education. He obtained a college degree from the nationally renowned Nassau Community College and then a law degree from the prestigious Hofstra law school. During his second year he worked as a summer associate at the well recognized Long Island law firm of Long, Pecker & Hardwood. However he just graduated in May, took the bar exam last month and he has been wasting away in the attic visiting this website. I am concerned that I invested badly in my son's education and have a sponge kid on my hands for as long as I live. My son has approached me about sending him to Lincoln Tech for an electrician's degree. I have spent too much money on him already. Will someone advise me if I should send my son to a technical school to learn a trade or should I just be patient and support him until he gets a job as a lawyer. A rapid response would be greatly appreciated.

I got no-offered. My evaluations were excellent as far as my work-product, so I know that's not the reason. However, the fact was that I could tell from the beginning that I didn't fit in there. I did good work and the firm claimed it was a "meritocracy" but, in the end, it was more of a "kiss-ass-itocracy." Ultimately, I think the firm made the right decision not to extend me an offer, because I wouldn't have been happy working with those asshats anyway. But, the way they went about doing so, the way they only gave me good evaluations and publicly promised that good work would be rewarded (and that it would not be a popularity contest) really set me up for disappointment. Furthermore, the way they informed me of the no-offer was very unprofessional. After the fact they made up bullshit claims about my work-ethic, which was funny because I had been specifically complimented on that very thing during both my summer evaluations. A firm that has to no-offer someone can make it painless or they can make it worse than necessary. This particular firm decided to be classless. This doesn't surprise me either, this is the same firm that let people work until 5am one day and then fired them when they came into work the next morning.

388 - you're retarded

and since when do plumbers have job security? Since when does ANYONE have job security?

378 - you're a secretary

368,

But they had a better shot at than freaking finance and T&E...genius...

what groups you rotated through has - at most - a very small impact on whether you got an offer, so not getting a certain group really doesn't matter. what would have made a difference is where you were in relation to the people that rotated through a particular group (i.e., social awkward or not).

Latham laid me off as a first year 6 months ago. My new position is selling hand jobs on Santa Monica Blvd.

Cooley PA no offered 3 litigation summers (out of 5). Not sure how the business summers faired.

361 -- so Milbank offered (or no-offered) based on school alone?

383 / 396,

I will let others opine on what played a role, but school RANK and other credentials were almost non-factors.

361

397 -- I get you. They based their decision on which schools they have "good fits" with.

I still doubt, however, that an exceptional performer throughout the summer would get no-offered based on school alone.

I hope you all get no-offered. The sense of entitlement in these comments is ridiculous. People get offers because of the quality of their work and whether they're normal people who want to do the work and demonstrate it - in a selective environment, school and grades have about as much bearing on offers as hair length does on your inseam.

- Midlevel waiting for word processing to turn a document so I can send it out to people who won't read it until Monday, because my fucking client says it needs to go out tonight.

I really do feel bad for all of the no offers. These firms have done a poor job in clearly communicating just about everything. However, the economy may help recalibrate everyone's expectations. I was suprised to enter law school and see how much people depend on these summer internships (cause it doesn't seem like they are much more than that) for permanent employment and hastily acquired BMW payments. But the firms should at least pay for the tution everybody wastes as they reinterview.

399 - that may be why people get offers, but it has almost nothing to do with why people DONT get offers in this environment

401- Agreed. Maybe 5-10% of a summer class can't do the work or do not want to. A few might be standouts. But for the vast majority of the class factors such as who you receive assignments from, the type of assignments you receive, the practice group you get most assignments from, whether a partner who likes to mentor young associates is near your assigned office etc. determine whether you'll get an offer.

The claims of entitlement are getting annoying. Recent grads and law students have a ton of debt and few means of putting a dent into it unless they get Biglaw. Without that offer at the end of the summer they will likely struggle under that immense debt load. These aren't welfare queens. These are some of the country's brightest minds (well maybe not the brightest but certainly very intelligent) and without that offer they will graduate with shitty or no job prospects.

I heard 0% offers at Thacher Proffitt. I'm really getting depressed now.

Sadly, the claims of entitlement are annoying but true. Just because you have a ton of debt to pay off does not mean that the rest of society has to ensure you have a high paying job so that you can pay down that debt quickly. As far as the rest of society is concerned, going to law school is a privilege that only a small minority get to enjoy. When you borrowed from SLM to go to law school, you are in effect borrowing from the people because Uncle Sam guarantees those loans. And now having tasted the sweet cherry, you are bitter that gravy train has come to a grinding halt. Face it: there are ways to make good on your student loan obligations. Even in this economy there are jobs for those who are willing to work. So stop whining. You have already been given more of the good things that society has to offer.

404-
"there are ways to make good on your student loan obligations. Even in this economy there are jobs for those who are willing to work."
--The problem is that this isn't necessarily true; hence the anger, frustration, and depression (even suicide) displayed by those laid off and still unable to find work.

There is something wrong when intelligent hard-working people whose only crime was investing in their own education struggle to find decent work. A society that cannot even ensure economic security for its best and brightest is fucked. It sure as hell not a 23 year-old's fault that we are in this situation. So cut them a little slack when they vent their frustration over difficult financial circumstances.

401 and 402,

I wholeheartedly agree.

It really disheartens me to read a post like that of the callous (supposedly) mid-level, and for that matter anyone else already at least somewhat established in Biglaw who cries "entitlement."

A person like this would have you think that he has somehow always been a lawyer, that he never had to start out himself in the profession, that like some sort of mythic legal Athena he was born fully formed out of some managing partner's forehead.

But people like this delude themselves. They too were once law students, once first-years, and they fail to appreciate how the (in all likelihood) better economic climate under which they were fortunate enough to push through their formative years gave them an opportunity that sadly a bunch of rising 3Ls are now finding out that they will not have.

Psychologists like to refer to a phenomenon known as the "fundamental attribution error." When someone else falters, we find it natural to attribute that failing to his character, his personality. "Oh, he was just no-offered because he was so awkward." When we ourselves falter, we have a better appreciation of the external factors, the context, that contributed to our lack of success. "Oh, I did nothing wrong. It was that jerk partner who hated the color of my socks."

This is not to say that either perception is completely right; certainly most misfortune stems from a combination of personal traits as well as outside forces. However, I would bet that many of those same more senior attorneys implying that their rise in their firms was due to a level of merit and hard work absent in those who now were rightly tossed would themselves have been kicked to the curb in present economic conditions.

There but for the grace of God go I. It never occurs to these people, because everybody thinks himself above-average. Everybody thinks that oh, of course, if I had been coming up now, I would have gotten an offer, because after all, I got an offer myself four, five, six years ago.

Well, no. Again, self-delusion. Again, fundamental attribution error. We are so quick to forget how much higher the offer rates were when we ourselves had the opportunity, how nervous we might have ourselves been starting out, the fact that we ourselves might have spent the better part of three hours a summer day in food comas rather than working, how the fact that we have stayed on is not necessarily a reflection of the outstanding work that we have done, but perhaps in large part of whom we chanced to work with and that in normal years, other folks naturally leave the firm, not because they were inexorably inferior, but because they had other opportunities that they preferred.

I don't necessarily expect a paradigm shift in this commentary, because I recognize that both sides are self-interested. Established attorneys feel betrayed when a firm lets them go to make room for an unproven newcomer, to keep the partnership tournament model humming. Newcomers, in turn, feel betrayed when they do not even get the chance to prove themselves in the first place that these more established attorneys received.

As internally comforting and convenient as it might seem to assume that when a summer is no-offered, or when an associate is fired, that it has to be just a matter of his personal failing, this is too simplistic and naive a notion to credit. Everyone posting here, in whatever capacity, knows that if God forbid he himself were to be let go, he would have an appreciation for the factors beyond his own control that led to that termination. I only wish that they would extend that same understanding to others.

I close on this. Biglaw is a notoriously status-conscious industry brimming with high-achievers in oversupply. Anyone connected to it has to know what a challenge to one's identity and sense of self it must be when such an unfortunate setback comes along.

Please, please, please just have a heart for these folks, and put yourselves in their shoes. Whatever shoes both of you might now have on.

I agree with 401-06. Yes, there's a sense of entitlement, but it's also true that the insiders are screwing the outsiders and that there's not necessarily work for those who want and are willing to do it. The law labor market is far from efficient, which is probably a symptom of the economic problems that got us here in the first place. For one thing: how do agents of the large institutions with huge concentrations of other people's wealth get away with pissing away shareholders' money on Biglaw? In a sane world there'd be a lot more boutiques and a much less bimodal salary distribution.

I take it that money is more important to Wilmer than morals - so sad that they sold out...

390 -- You shouldn't have summered at Hunton.

399 - be glad you (still) have the fucking work. that was me 18 months ago, and now i'm laid-off.

What I enjoyed was talking to midlevels who bragged about how much fun they had during their SA stints: constant events and drinking, hooking up left and right with other summers, blowing off assignments...

MY class sure as hell didn't have that experience. We worked very hard. There was very little "play time".

You midlevels are simply unable to relate to us... your SA experience was a ridiculous joke compared to ours. As of just 2 years ago, getting an offer was virtually automatic.

@408: morals are still important at Wilmer- no one wants to get disbarred. Or did you mean morale? Agreed morale is not important.

406:

I'll share some advice as you get out in the real world. Don't state with 20 sentences what you can state with 5. Clients, partners, senior associates and the like will stop reading after the 3rd line or if they see the phrase "paradighm shift" much earlier. That said, get over yourself. Students graduating today face the same issues law students in the late 80's, mid 90s and to a lesser extent 2001 faced.

Dear Lat, Kash And Elie,

Please do an open thread on What Is Going On At WilmerHale? and include in it the following points taken from the comments here: (1) WH Managing Partners Bill & Bill sent a threatening memo to the firm after the last ATL posting; (2) the person who sent the last posting to ATL was fired, and we're not talking "transitioned out for performance reasons" we're talking, grab your personal belongings and security will escort you out of the building now; (3) Associates are scared to post anything even as the "transitioning out" continues; (4) morale is at an all-time low; (5) the firm is making some decisions based on what might end up on ATL; (6) Upward evaluations of partners were eliminated, allegedly for budgetary reasons but probably because so many partners are criticized in them; and (7) the DPRK may be a better place to work, even though Fraser Hunter of NY is thinking really hard about how to make Wilmer a better place.

Did I miss anything? But recognize that there may be no comments because everyone is too scared. Not me though, my last day is in about a week thanks to the transitioning program.

The only thing that the rants on this page do is solidify the view of this generation of law students as a bunch of self-entitled, passive agressive douche bags. There's families losing their homes and you're bitching about getting paid 160K pro rata for the summer as a 24 year old and not getting an offer for a job that isn't going to start for another 2 years. On what planet are you living?? In what other field does anyone guarantee a 20 year old with no experience that in 2 years they'll be raking in 160K or any amount of salary to essentially be a clerk. And all these debt arguments are ridiculous...there's plenty of teachers, engineers, primary care doctors, actors/dancers with as much if not more debt than lawyers -- the one differentiating factor is they actually like what they do as opposed to what they make.

I don't really understand why everyone thinks Wilmer's actions are worse than what any other firm has done. Is Wilmer the only firm that has lied to associates and staff? Mgmt has been saying "publicly" since last Nov/Dec that 2009 will be an extremely difficult year. If you're an associate who's flown under the radar and who does not excel at the bread and butter tasks that Wilmer thrives on ($$$), I think it was pretty clear 2009 would be shape up or ship out time.

Eliminating upward evals was terrible because there are sr lawyers who are truly awful at managing and need feedback. The climate of secrecy is what really freaks people out. Including the cryptic "initiatives" that have been launched recently.

Has anyone heard anything about Cooley?

@418 - I don't think anyone disputes that those who were not up to par needed to be pushed out - it was a long time coming and really the firm should have been more aggressive about it all long.

You're absolutely right about management issues. What you may not have experienced is that some partners known among associates as having management issues are still considered rising stars to firm management, and those same partners sometimes set their sites on truly excellent associates who had the misfortune of pissing off those partners in some unknown way. That results in the "transitioning out" (after months or years of torture by the partners in question) of those excellent associates. To me, that is one of the biggest problems. Combine it with secrecy, spin, and initiatives, and Wilmer is no longer a friendly place. If only other firms were hiring...

er...@416 re wilmer, not 418

How many law firms (if brave enough, names please) have threatened action against anyone who posts on ATL ? Are many decisions, or at least the timing of those decisions, based on potenial fallout ?

418

I'd say no longer friendly is a bit of an understatement. I think for many, its outright oppressive.

414

Let's do it. I've got a piece to share - and will do so freely. What do I have to lose? My last day is quickly approaching as well. It is those that have not yet lost their jobs that are the most impacted by the memo though, and I'm thinking we will get radio silence from them.

Oh, but we must all be aware that the WH public relations machine will be all over the thread like a fly on shit. Word is the firm hired a PR firm after the first ATL post to manage the bad press.

@414 - add to the Wilmer list (8) cryptic "initiatives" that apparently have been launched recently.

#308 = WilmerHale's PR person

amen @ 406

405 & 406

No one should be defining ‘decent work’ as one where a 24 year old gets paid $160,000 a year to essentially proofread. There is plenty of work in the $30,000 a year range but none of you would even consider it. Believe it or not, you can pay down that student debt and still feed yourself on $30,000 a year. There will be no fancy clothes, no wild parties and public transportation is a must; but at least you can feel proud of yourself for rolling with the punches.

Attribution error indeed! That is perhaps the most fucking retarded post I have seen on ATL. If you do not get offered, it does mean that for whatever reason you were not as good as the other guys who were given jobs. The people in this bucket have to recognize that a big law career is no longer possible for them and make plans accordingly. No one will want to hire a summer associate reject. The one thing you ought to be doing now is looking for a part time job when term starts so that you can have a cash cushion when graduation comes. Regardless of what other people think, you need to move on.

To poster #399:

Please be sure that your time entry for the day accurately reflects your activities. May I suggest: "Being a holier-than-thou, condescending asshole while posting on an internet site; complaining about my 'fucking client' and its stupid demands."

I'm sure they'll be thrilled to know that your firm was charging them $400/hour for such services. And I'm equally sure that this is exactly the type of "quality" work that got you an offer four or five years ago.

Speaking of a sense of entitlement, why do you feel entitled to work free Saturday nights/Sunday mornings?

To the Wilmer partners who are no doubt wondering why anyone would publicly trash the firm:

Because you aren't listening. Because we're afraid to speak our minds to you. Because everything is answered with "spin". Because the firm culture has changed, and you're doing whatever you can to try to divert our attention from the problem instead of trying to address it. Because WilmerHale, Wilmer, Hale & Dorr, all used to be amazing places to work. And while WilmerHale is still a stellar firm full of amazing lawyers, it is not a pleasant place to be an associate any more than any other big, sweatshop firm. Either accept that, or change it, but don't try to spin it into something else.

The OMM office I was in had an 80%+ offer rate. I doubt that the firm's overall rate was much lower than that.

I never realized how many losers (ahem) I mean law students commented on this blog.

406: "Psychologists like to refer to a phenomenon known as the "fundamental attribution error."

This is the stupidist thing I have read in months. Psych majors are the most useless associates I have ever met. They know nothing about anything. The ole-fundamental-attribution-error. I am sure the client will be fascinated by this insight.

406: "Psychologists like to refer to a phenomenon known as the "fundamental attribution error."

This is the stupidist thing I have read in months. Psych majors are the most useless associates I have ever met. They know nothing about anything. The ole-fundamental-attribution-error. I am sure the client will be fascinated by this insight.

414 and others harping on WH -

Sorry, but the d-bag who posted a firm memo to ATL, especially from work, should be fired immediately. I would guess that such a memo, email, whatever is marked as "firm confidential" or similar.

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy reading these internal firm documents (and would like to hear what WH is doing), but do people seriously believe that it is ok to send confidential firm information to a blog? Do they really think there should be no consequences once you caught doing so? At least have the good sense to do from somewhere other than your work computer. Same goes for nasty comments about your own firm.

Many firms now tailor their memos with the expectation that it will end up on this site. At my own firm, we even suspect that management sent our layoff memo to atl, while at my former firm, they never put this sort of thing in writing. Again, as much as I enjoy reading this stuff, I think many firms are less likely to be forthcoming with their associates since they now expect the audience to be the entire atl readership. If you are going to start an atl thread about your internal firm memos and meetings, don't complain that the firm isn't honest, doesn't tell you enough, etc. And don't complain if you get fired when are caught doing so. You asked for it.

Warning to the recently no offered:

Stay away from my spot on Santa Monica Blvd. Sallie Mae's on my ass and I can't afford to lose any hand job sales to you.

-laid off Latham 1st year

"Believe it or not, you can pay down that student debt and still feed yourself on $30,000 a year"

I do not believe this dipshit. I ride the bus, wear shitty clothes, eat garbage and still have to pay loans with loans despite my part time job.

You, my friend, are a mathematically illiterate douche.

Getting no offered is as bad as you think. Latham Lathamed me after four months of work (well, in reality, they had no work to give out). The seniors and midlevels have done fine, but the first years are completely fucked. I don't think no offereds will do any better unless you get gov honors.

As others have said, whining, moaning, and complaining isn't going to help you. Working on Plan-B will. No-offered summers are in a substantially better position than laid off associates because they can float on Sally Mae for a year. It's cliche, but the true test that separates the successful from the failures is the ability to rise and meet challenges. If you fold up like a little b-otch, then the firm was right to no-offer you.

I propose we all meetup for a MASS SUICIDE IN MANHATTAN.

436, there is nothing good out there for any laid off first year or no offered to have a plan B.

My plan B is suicide

Can't believe the Milbank bloodbath. What does this mean for incoming associates that are supposed to start in January?

Part of me thinks they will cut half of us too...

322, which Kirkland office and which practice group?

425-

As someone who spent a brief period of time trying to pay back student loans and live on $55,000 a year, if you honestly believe someone can do that on $30,000 a year, you're an idiot who has never tried it and neither known nor bothered to keep in touch with anybody who has ever tried it. Seriously, you put forth strong opinions having no idea what you're talking about.

To do the rough math, it depends on what student loan package you have, but say the bill comes out to $2,000 a month, that comes out to $24,000 a year. Say you live somewhat with a low cost of rent (maybe $400-500 a month), at $500 a month that comes out to $6,000. So you're already at $30,000 not factoring in taxes. Say you allot $10 a day for food (with nothing else besides that, no drinks no going out, etc.), that comes out to $70 a week, $280 a month, $3360 a year (that would be damn near impossible in some cities and you could say "move away from those cities," but those all also the cities that are much more likely to have jobs in them). So, just on that alone that comes out to $33,360 a year.

That doesn't include any utility bills, any drinking, any movies, any going out at all, any clothes, getting more than a mattress for your apartment--nothing. You'll obviously have to earn a decent amount more than this to get even this amount after taxes.

Depending on the state, figures like rent and food jump up tremendously from what I'm discussing as well--I'm using only the best case scenario. God help you if you're trying to do what I just described in New York (again, you can say "move away from those states," but those states are where you'll get these jobs). You might say "try graduated payments," but that's treading water and only temporarily, that's not paying your loans back.

You pulling this completely out your a-- and have no idea what you're talking about--If you really want me to go into more detail on this, rest assured I would be happy to elaborate on the many other factors that go behind "you have no idea what you're talking about," but the point is you have no idea what you're talking about.

Sadly, although it would have been great for milbank to take 100% due to the need for more bodies, a 50% offer rate actually helps the "2009" incoming class. Now they have reduced the log jam that would have resulted in fall 2010/winter 2011 and gives the 2009s some breathing room.

I hear ya though - a 50% offer rate is game changing and says that any and all options are being considered.

432 - I was wondering when the PR people would arrive...come on guys - you've totally dropped the ball here. We've been trashing WH for a full two days, and there you were taking the weekend off. Well get on the ball - you are being paid a few laid off associate's salaries to spin this. Get a move on. And you'd better start on an "official" firm statement for the open thread tomorrow if it happens...Happy Sunday.

176 - another no-offered wilmer summer here. get your facts straight.

437: If you're joking, it's not funny. People have actually done that and devistated those around them. If you're not joking, please seek help. It's just money, after all.

There are jobs out there, you just have to be tenacious and positive because they're not going to go to fall in the laps of quitters.

And if you're in school, you still have loans which means you're not worried about where your next can of soup is coming from for a little while. So maybe you scale back on the Chivas-and-Chronic extravaganza you had planned for 3L year, but you can get though this.

--436

Thank you 440 ... it is refreshing to find a law student who can do basic math and had to do so under real life pressures.

-434

444

It is not just money. It is working with smart colleagues on significant cases/deals as opposed to working with morons doing dog bite cases for the rest of your life.

The money is what keeps you from getting out of the profession, since by going to law school you've taken on significant debt and have little capacity to get any additional education that will allow you to change fields. Shitlawyers would be better off doing something else, especially if you had the creds to get biglaw, because you're probably smart. Handling these shitlaw cases adds little to society.

If I can't fix this, and every day that passes it seems less likely, it's gun in mouth time.

re 367 - can other goodwin summers discuss this? is this assessment true?

442 - 432 here - not PR, not WH. It's just common sense. I simply don't feel sorry for someone getting canned for trashing their own firm from firm computers. Duh. Save it for your home computer, or even better, a public computer.

448. Rumor is he didn't do it from firm computers. Rumor is he was fired based on a rumor that he did it - and that rumor was based on him apparently telling a friend that he did it. Who knows if the poor fuck actually did it of didn't - either way, he was ushered out of there in a heartbeat and was made an example for all.

449. Being fired due to rumors. Reason No. 11,235 why working in a big firm sucks.

Some perspective from someone who graduated from T14 law school in the mid-90s when the job market was not great.

Getting no offered is not the end of the world. There are plenty of folks who got no offered, went a different route (eg gov't, LLM Tax, abroad) then came back to BigLaw because they had skills/know how/contacts that were in demand and went onto become very successful partners. In fact, several I know are doing much better than those who started as a first year and climbed the BigLaw ladder at 2200hr/yr pace and frankly, they haven't had to work as hard because they figured out their wealth of contacts from gov't and elsewhere have helped them become productive business developers rather than mere billable hour drones. In other words, they had much more control of their career not having to rely on someone to be fed.

Lives and careers are rarely linear. This could be all a blessing even though it may seem hard to believe at this time. On a deeply personal level, I suspect you all know that to be the case.

448

Yes - that is the same story I've heard. Hence, everyone scared shitless that a mere rumor can result in being escorted out of the building. No wonder no one will even read ATL at work anymore at WH.

I got fired from WilmerHale for posting this.

447- I don't know exactly who was no-offered, but my assessment was that 90% of the class took it seriously and did the minimum amount of work necessary, and then a few outliers came in with the sense that they were entitled to an offer regardless of their performance. 367 seems to have inside info of the offering process and I wouldn't be surprised if that info is true. If you go to Goodwin and approach your work with a serious and positive attitude, they're not going to pull the wool out from under you and no-offer you at the end.

The Alaskan people were cold offered by sarah palin

Just wanted to say thanks to 451 for the words of encouragement.

I think it is sad that many firms that could afford to avoid layoffs & no offer by making a relatively small sacrifice in the profit per partner are choosing not to do so, in part because of the fear of partner defections. These people are not partners in the traditional sense - they are just mercenaries on constant lookout for the next highest offer.

Borrow dischargeable debt to pay back the student loan, and then file.

So did they WH tipster's friend rat him out? What a fucking tool.

Thanks 451

Law Firm Partners,

The reason laid off or no offered associates from one firm spew hate about your firm and not another firm is because they feel that you have done something unjust. That usually involves use of nepotism or politics in firing/offer decisions. Most people quickly realize that it is their fault if they did not show up to work, or do a bad job. But when people see what others who did not show up to work, or who did a crappy job or who are plain stupid remain/get offers while they who did work very hard, with good attitude and are capable and smart get dinged, they feel a long-lasting sense of unfairness that they will keep with them for a long time. Thus, you firm will get bad reputation and your prestige will suffer. You will also get retaliation. Accordingly, it is in your best interest to employ merit in layoff/offer decisions with an occasional save for a son of a client or another partner. It is not in your interest to favor people based on how much of your ass they kissed, or how fun they are to look at or how much they talk about baseball or other irrelevant factors. Please, for your sake and for our sakes, employ merit. Maybe people won't have you as much as they hate Latham. And as you can tell, 6 months of severance won't buy back the feeling of unfairness.

-laidoff latham midlevel (without a sense of entitlement)

457--firms that ignore economics ignore it at their peril--see Heller, Thelen, etc. Most firms are seeing a decline in PPP and are dealing with their unproductive partners as a result. Also, they have to determine overall no of employees as well. Obviously it is partners responsibility to bring in work and not associates. But if the work isn't sufficient to employ 50 new associates you can't just hire 50. To blithely say partners should take more cuts so that more SA's can get offers is simply silly.

i heard seward kissel has a 100% offer rate

As a relatively junior partner at a smaller firm who makes much less than my BigLaw peers and actually has a life outside the office, I will throw in my two cents.

Although law students who have pretty much always had things go their way don't realize it, there is life outside of BigLaw and you can actually make a pretty good living outside of it. Indeed, some of the slimy plaintiffs' lawyers make a ton of money. Pretty much the only way you are going to make big money right after law school, when you're only real value to a firm is that you can bill lots of hours and have your rates justified by you being the best and the brightest, is by working in BigLaw. If you made all your law school plans based on the the belief you were somehow guaranteed a starting salary of $145k (at the time), then your predictions were even more wrong than those of the firms that have deferred, laid off or no-offered people. At least the people who made those decisions are still doing quite well, albeit as a result of screwing their subordinates.

Simply put, there is life and a good living to be made outside of BigLaw and BigLaw has a disproportionate number of miserable people anyway. Getting no offered sucks. I've been there and it cost me a huge amount of money, especially in the first few years. The thing is that once it happens, you need to get over it and look for an alternative plan. If what is happening now is your only setback in life, you are far more fortunate than you now realize.

F&R NY = 25% (1/4). If you have the background for pharma and want to do it, Fish will hire you. If you don't, don't bother.

466th!

McDermott no-offered all its female summers. What a bunch of sexists.

-461

I am a laid off Latham first year and I hate that firm with a passion. There was little work in the first place, I was told my work was good, and I was canned after four months anyway. If I'd gone to any other firm I'd still have a job. Not only that, the stupid pricks kept around the son of a partner who couldn't even pass the bar on his first try. 90% of first time takers from ABA schools pass NY on the first try, but daddy's boy couldn't do it.

Fuck Latham, Bob Dell, and Dave Gordon. You stupid jackasses could've found another way to deal with the disaster you created. You should both be fired for incompetence.

468

Somebody call a waaaaaaaaaaambulance

451: That is probably the most useful post I've seen in this thread thus far. Thank you. I'd advise others to read it as well. Very encouraging.

469

sounds like somethig you would say, bob dell

The last time Wilmer was truly a "good" place to work was prior to the merger with Hale and Dorr. It's been downhill in terms of morale, work life, and dickish "initiatives" ever since. WH is only finally getting some publicity for this crap now. I feel for you all who have been screwed over by Wilmer recently and for those of you who are still there. Thank goodness I jumped ship long ago.

Listen to 451. The problem with this website is that it is filled with law students and summer associates with no more perspective than what happened to them last week. And first year associates with no perspective beyond what happened to them a few months ago.

Young lawyers with no perspective end up coming here and taking what other young lawyers say as gospel. But those people know no more, and probably know less, than they do. It's a bad situation.

@473 - does anyone really base their career decisions on this site full of anonymous comments? There is no way to know what is made up and what is true, so why would anyone take it as gospel? If they do, they're idiots.

The best way to judge a firm is through meetings with its people and examples of the type of legal work it does. Not by bitter associates posting comments on ATL. And I say that as a bitter associate who posts comments on ATL (from home, so I don't get fired).

449 - in that case, that really blows, and I can feel sorry for such an individual if that was the case. This brings up the other important lesson . . . never have a witness.

448

474

you are a retard. under no circumstances should you accept the company line as true. i work at a firm, and i know i can't air its dirty laundry to potential recruits, so i am NEVER completely honest with them. if people are bitter, you're best off finding out WHY and judging for yourself if they have good reason.

476 - 474 here - I've interviewed at plenty of firms over my career - you don't need to hear the dirty laundry to sense there is a problem with the firm culture. You sir, are the retard.

476, not buying into the company line does not = accepting posts on this website as true. 474, yes I do think too many peope rely to heavily on this website and accept comments stated here as facts. Not that this website isn't entertaining and doesn't provide some good information. But I do think people rely on what's posted here more than they necessarily should even if not "basing career decisions" on AbovetheLaw.

-473

"The best way to judge a firm is through meetings with its people and examples of the type of legal work it does."

Let me fix this:

The best way to judge a firm is through meetings with people that recently worked there and examples of the type of legal work it does.

If you want an honest opinion, listen to a former associate rather than a current associate. A good lawyer will never overtly badmouth an ex-employer but will be much more forthcoming about the firm than an associate that is forced to sell the firm. Some of the more bitter associates at my old place put on their best smiles at recruiting dinners and other events.

I'm a rising 3L who hasn't posted on this thread before, and is still waiting to hear back from my firm.

To respond to 474 and the comments following it- I absolutely would consider and weigh heavily the comments of a thread like this, especially if they are not factually disputed by other commentators. Especially if I didn't have a former associate to talk with (which, as 479 suggests, is the best method to find out about a firm). But since I don't know any former associates at any firm, really my only way to get info is from law news websites like this and some others, and anonymous comments on sites like this and Autoadmit. I know that anonymous comments are not a perfect, or even good, source of information, but they're better than just swallowing the firm line.

I think something else to consider is this- if all the comments are negative, and nobody disputes what they are saying, what does that say about a firm? Wouldn't at least some happy associates, who surely read this blog and comments, respond to specifically deny any factual allegations made by the commentators? I know that's what I'd do if I liked my firm. And these firms all have lots of people working there- somebody would respond to refute this stuff. If it doesn't happen, that's very telling.

Getting by on $30,000 a year will be tough, but it can be done. Obviously you cannot do it in New York City or San Francisco where the cost of living is highest, but it can be done outside of these expensive metropolitan areas. Since most legal jobs require the candidate to be at a major city, it is likely then that you will not be working in any capacity as a lawyer. Accommodation will have to be cheaply obtained by living with roommates (literally sharing rooms with other people like how dirt poor immigrants do it) or better yet moving back in with your parents and saving on rent. It is a humiliating step down but it can be done.

Instead of threatening to commit suicide and forcing mommy and daddy to pay back those student loans for you, there are things you could do to make good on your obligations. Law school was a blast, and now it has to be paid for.

458 - That won't work.

480 - not wise to believe what you read here. There is a lot of rumor and a lot of hyperbole.

454 - that is absolute bullshit.

Exactly. I'm a former associate of a big firm and I am pretty candid about the pluses and minuses of my old firm. And as an associate, I up and up lied to kids interviewing. Because seriously. None of us (aside from the few lucky [?] ones) were going to end up here for more than a few years.

I do kind of wonder what system could exist where a client or law student could learn about a firm from its former clients and former associates. Anon boards are the best fit right now.

485 - what firm were you at?

462 -

Like I said – these law firms are made up of mercenaries, not partners. That’s why they can’t count on “partners” to stick around when things get tough and must jack up the PPP by any means necessary (layoffs and no-offer) even if doing so may not be the best strategy for the group as a whole in the long run. The mentality is every "partner" for him/herself - there is no loyalty.

457

At 190 - I can confirm 7 offers at Blank Rome in Philadelphia, and I am almost positive there were 14 summer associates. Blank Rome had also consistently given a positive message that it was hoping to hire nearly all of the summer associates.

462--And you are an expert because you are what a 2L? 3L? 2d year associate? Try to understand economics if you can. Actually most are pretty loyal and want a good place to work but not a sinking ship. Also most of you are too affected by NY. There are many more places to practice law where you can become a partner, have a good practice and a life. So the world does not begin and end in NY. Oh, whoops for many of you it may end in NY,

367/454-This just doesn't comport with my own experience. I think it's absurd to allege that no-offerees were working working 7-hour days with long lunches... the summers I knew in Boston were doing substantial amounts of work and often putting in nights and weekends. I know I was.

Given the limitations imposed on lunches, I sincerely doubt that anyone was taking four per week. You're looking for an easy way to impugn those who didn't receive offers, but I don't think it's that simple.

In the end, it likely came down to less obvious issues, some of which may have been beyond the summers' control.

- 104/127

QUINN REMAINS

440 -

If you are paying 2,000/month, your loans must be 60k/year or a retard. Feel free to admit which.

If you are actually a student who has debt, and not a d-bag trying to justify your viewpoint, you would know that if, upon graduation, you have a job paying $30k/year, you can apply for a hardship adjustment. This allows you to extend the payment period of the loan up to (I believe) 20 years -- I could be wrong because it was been awhile since I have dealt with this myself.

So taking that into consideration, you should re-do some of your math.

Comment removed by moderator.

492 - Think before posting dipshit. $2,000 x 12 = $24,000. Feel free to admit whether you are the dumbest fucker on this board, or the dumbest fucker on this planet.

"If you are actually a student who has debt, and not a d-bag trying to justify your viewpoint, you would know that if, upon graduation, you have a job paying $30k/year, you can apply for a hardship adjustment."

-

492- or, like I said, you could apply for "graduated payments."

However, hardship payments or unemployment deferrals, like graduated payments, allow you to get away with paying minimal to no payments. They allow you (as I mentioned) to tread water. If you want to actually make a dent in your student loans, which is what I was addressing, those won't get you far.

I'll second 494- You're the dumbest fucker on this board or the dumbest fucker on this planet.

I meant 60k/year of law school for a total of 180k loans. I cant figure out how you got to a loan package requiring 24k/year.

My mistake. I should assume someone who thinks they have to pay 2k/month in loans wouldn't need to have every step outlined.

-492, someone with who went to law school on loans and doesnt have $2k/month in payments, even without any adjustments.

If you're on this board whining about loans, cost of law school, and the end of your life because of the economy forced firms into not hiring you.....you wouldn't have made it in the best of economic conditions. Sorry son. You lose.

I meant 60k/year of law school for a total of 180k loans. I cant figure out how you got to a loan package requiring 24k/year.

Tuition room and board for all the top schools now is about 60-70k a year. So why exactly do you find this odd?

Sorry, missed the quotation marks, but:

"I meant 60k/year of law school for a total of 180k loans. I cant figure out how you got to a loan package requiring 24k/year."

Tuition room and board for all the top schools now is about 60-70k a year. So why exactly do you find this odd?

P.S., for the record, I can fortunately say I am no longer in the position of having to pay back student loans while making 55k (I am making a decent amount today), so while you may be tempted to, you won't get far by trying to write this off as whining--but it is annoying when people actually argue shit when they clearly are clueless about the topic. It also might bug me when finance guys write off lawyers as merely being bad at math, but apparently the stereotype holds true in a few instances.

-440

grossly mismanaged and undiversified firms like Latham should not be in the top 10 and never should've been. The bloodbath they were forced to inflict is symptomatic of much larger problems.

Top 10 firms should be firms that are superior across numerous practice groups and have high PPP and RPL. Diversification should play a larger role as well. We've seen what a boon it is via firms like Kirkland and Weil to have well-developed and superior practice groups across the spectrum (IP Lit, bankruptcy, etc...)