Hey - wanna see the most pathetic human being, legal idiot on the planet? Just found his HILARIOUS blog!!!
http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com

Elie, I know you had a little spat with Lat about this kinds of stuff, but....

What does this mean? "If the training was really good, I bet young attorneys would even pay of the opportunity to be educated."

Completely agree. Law firms have an obligation to help others. They have benefitted from the legal rules which transfer wealth upwards that pervade our society. This has always been in the name of economic efficiency.

Be that as it may, fairness requires that those who benefit from those rules treat those who are in lesser circumstances with dignity and understanding. Firms have gone a long way toward this through pro bono programs and the like, but this might also be another great way of being our brother's keeper.

Mad props for the Cartman reference Elie.

3...

In defense of Elie...your turn of phrase "this kinds of stuff" is probably not a great one for someone who is criticizing writing skills.

FAIL.

Nice covert edit from "of" to "for," Elie.

Answer: no. Unless biglaw deferrals are then given to those who really want to go into public interest.

-May graduate waiting for job to start in "biglaw"

Soy el comentarisa numero ocho (8), cabrones. So me maman la pinga.

This is ridiculous. It's a very bad idea that has completely twisted the supply and demand in public interest. Young attorneys who intended to go into public interest from the beginning or laid off attorneys are getting squeezed out of public interest positions.

Some people have been fucked twice by Biglaw: once for getting laid off, and another for getting a spot taken at a public interest organization by a deferred biglaw associate.

@4 - Your post is a great illustration of Poe's law. Obviously, this was your attention and you did very well. On behalf of the ATL community, I thank you for that refresher.

These public interest deferrals are going to create a ton of small annoying lawsuits. Get ready for a bunch of employment/landlord-tenant/discrimination/bs suits by overzealous baby lawyers.

Soy el comentarisa numero ocho (8), cabrones. So me maman la pinga.

Soy el comentarisa numero ocho (8), cabrones. So me maman la pinga.

6, 3 here, it was (a) irony, and (b) the customer (reader) is always right. ;)

This is ridiculous. It's a very bad idea that has completely twisted the supply and demand in public interest. Young attorneys who intended to go into public interest from the beginning or laid off attorneys are getting squeezed out of public interest positions.

Some people have been fucked twice by Biglaw: once for getting laid off, and another for getting a spot taken at a public interest organization by a deferred biglaw associate.

Maybe it's time for US bars to bring back the internship requirements that other bars around the world have (i.e. Canada, UK, etc.). Graduates must spend one year "articling" at a firm/court/clinic in order to get their ticket to practice.

Soy el comentarisa numero quince (15), cabrones. So, me maman la pinga.

rofl @ the public interest proles ranting in the comments of the ABA article.

Why does the organization call itself the "Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law"? To distinguish itself from a committee advocating for civil rights that are not "under law"? During floods, does it become the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Water?

The supposed win-win of deferees being placed in public interest jobs is a myth. I work in a public interest organization, which provides free legal services. My colleagues and I chose to make public interest our career because we are committed to supporting the rights of people in low income communities. We have the same oppressive loans as everyone else, but we chose to make sacrifices to do this work for the long haul. Now our organization, and likely many other public interest organizations, are spending lots of precious resources training new attorneys who a) did not choose public interest as a career and b) are going to be gone in a year. In doing so public interest organizations are not hiring the new public interest law oriented law school graduates.

Why does the organization call itself the "Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law"? To distinguish itself from a committee advocating for civil rights that are not "under law"? During floods, does it become the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Water?

I'm a deferred assoc. at a public interest organization, and 2 months in I can definitely say that the experience has been VERY valuable. And I'm a Republican -- I mean valuable in the sense that I'll be a better lawyer once this year is over.

10 has a good point although I wouldn't be as colorful!

if this means there is an expansion of the supply of PI positions, then maybe it makes sense but if this is taking opportunities away from those who intend to make PI law their career, then there could be short and long term harm.

Of course reality is less black and white but I'm sure there are those who've been told they would've been hired but for the law firms swooping in with stipend adn requirement for public interest. All well intended but there are unintended consequences.

I'm a deferred associate currently at a public interest organization, and I am going to be a HELL of a lot better of a lawyer after this year than if I'd spent it in BigLaw doing doc review in a Newark warehouse.

Are there stats anywhere on avereage debt loads for new U.S. lawyers as compared to other countries? Surely we are light-years higher. The tuition system is broke if all it produces is three years of education that might qualify you for another year of training.

Young lawyers don't hate public service, they hate being broke with no chance to remedy that situation.

Preemptive strike: JaKe, your thoughts?

Ugh. I worked at a public interest legal organization for a while back when "times were good", and we participated in a program where a big law firm sent us two summer clerks for the last five weeks of the summer to do pro bono work. Oh, make that four weeks, because they *had* to stay at the firm for the big summer party. Well, maybe three weeks because they *had* to be around for the dinner cruise. When they actually showed up with two weeks left, they were pretty much useless human beings who made it apparent that they hated being there. A blanket public-interest requirement forces bad people on good organizations, and I can't imagine it would be any better if it was a year-long deferral program. I hope this doesn't happen.

@3 - I agree with #7, your post was a spectacular illustration of Skitt's law.

@3 - I agree with #7, your post was a spectacular illustration of Skitt's law.

6 - Please explain how pointing out a typo in 3's own post is in any way a defense of Elie. Because 3 made a typo it is okay for Elie to do so as well?

YUGE LOGIC FAIL

Sure, as long as the public is interested in paying me $145k.

27 nailed it.

Mandatory PI deferrals are a bad idea. An increased number of optional fellowships would be perfectly fine though. Look, not every lawyer has an interest in practicing the public interest side of the law. Some people are made for it (in terms of legal interests, skill set), but others definitely aren't. There's absolutely no benefit in flooding the PI market with incoming firm associates who have no interest in PI. They're going to have a miserable time there, and likely, make others miserable as well. Optional fellowships good -- let the associates interested in PI have a chance to practice it, but permanent PI deferrals for all bad.

I'm currently a public interest fellow, and I could not be happier. I expect to go into biglaw with more trial experience than most of the senior associates at my firm.

4 = Republican?

34: That's great your PI fellowship has provided you with valuable trial experience, but how about those of us with no interest in litigation or regulatory work? You don't see many PI opportunities that would provide similarly valuable experience to associates interested in most areas of corporate law or IP.

"Should Public Interest Deferrals Be A Permanent Part of the Biglaw Experience?"

No.

I agree completely with 21 and 33, among some others. Many people went to law school with the sincere intention of going into public interest - in fact, some of them went to less-expensive state law schools so that their debt burden would be lower. It would be a shame for them to be squeezed out of their field of choice by deep-pocketed law firms and students from more expensive schools with greater name recognition. I'm in favour of optional public interest fellowships.

Why's everyone so ready to admit that BIGLAW doesn't help people and is just a destructive force in society that needs to be balanced out by a little work in the "public interest?"

A recent grad that works public interest law would be worthless to BigLaw after the completion of the public interest stint. Public interest law is totally at odds with BigLaw.

I really question the notion of training. It is very difficult to get anyone rational to tolerate the crucible of really meaningful training without the enormous incentives of meaningful pay. (This is independent of the notion that the pay is sort of a prepay for tolerating emotional abuse.) There are a gifted few who can do it, and they tend to thrive in any environment. On the flip side, it can be (sometimes) be hard to obtain the good training in the NGO world --

this suggestion is a lose-lose for everyone

d-baggy biglaw associate: too much time spent with do-gooders and not enough time with billable hourzzz

elitist do-gooder: d-baggy biglaw monsters polluting the plight of "true" lawyers

only shenanigans will ensue! or perhaps just passive hateration played out through awkward e-mails.

28-29: Oh, the irony; you realize you double-posted, right?

I can't speak to how other organizations are using deferred associates, but where I'm working no salaried positions have been displaced. Deferred associates are not stealing public interest jobs.

the plan is bad. first, people took on huge loans in anticipation of paying jobs. Some law students even have families to support and were counting on these biglaw jobs to pay the bills. For them, this "wonderful learning experience" at public interest is a nightmare. their social interest was in taking care of their family. Second, as other posters have mentioned, this removes public interest as a viable opportunity for those who desired it as a career; there are simply many fewer available spots for them. What's going to happen when things turn around and these organizations have depended on these deferred associates who have now taken advantage of the investment the public interest org has made in training and will be bringing the commodity elsewhere? BAD IDEA. Third, maybe it *is* a great training opportunity for new graduates. In that case what is wrong with the law schools!? Schools should simply get rid of the useless 3rd year of classes and let people do full time internships at public interest organizations instead.

I didn't spend three years working my ass off to help poors. Fuck them.

44 -- great to hear it didn't fuck you over. However, it HAS fucked over plenty of people who have had their public interest jobs taken away, delayed, reduced, etc.

All so that somebody with a secured high-paying job a year from now can get their kicks playing "real lawyer" before they hit their doc review.

- First year working at a firm who feels bad that my friends are losing jobs and experience they wanted to deferred kids who should not be there

In a previous career, I was an hardware engineer. Every so often, HR and other do-gooders would arrange some Saturday project to wire a school or community organization's offices and set up computers. Despite the pressure put on managers to get the techies to show up, invariably, the engineers and our own IT people never showed up and the idea turned into a clusterfuck.

In my 5+ years in big law, I handled two pro-bono cases. Each "client" felt the need to email me at least 10 times per day. I hated every minute. If you want to deal with the great unwashed masses, more power to you.

Could someone PLEASE make a schtick out of public interest deferrals?

WTF?

Almost all public interest jobs train litigators.

Biglaw can actually absorb litigators, but can't absorb transactional people.

Why not just have the firms take on the litigators and loan the transactional people out to their clients, assuming they can think of someway to use free labor.

Firms strengthen their client relationships, young lawyers make business contacts, clients get free work.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense than haveing a future M&A lawyer hold some immigrants hand through deportation proceedings.

Public interest law, now what the fuck is that. Like community organizer, some sort of bullshit position to fill space on a resume. The public should have an interest in getting rid of as many lawyers as possible, not supporting them. The rich get BigLaw, and the poor get public interest attorneys. Both are full of shit.

To whomever had this idea: Please have your vision checked. I am afraid you are short sighted.

When will people understand that this is GOOD for public interest! You have extra man hours for these organizations that are free, at a time when most public interest organizations are in dire financial straits. If it was not good for PI, they would not employ these deferred associates.

These jobs are not stolen by big law. These non-paying jobs are created by big law. They would not exist otherwise. It's not like the head of the public interest organization is taking home a fatter paycheck because he cut costs by hiring the free big law associate.

Public interest is deriving a huge benefit: free labor. Not to mention many of the kids entering big law are sharp and willing to work hard. I know plenty of my peers who are excited about this opportunity, because they care about public interest organizations...they just don't want to live a life of poverty.

You can't find a public interest job because the economy sucks, not because of evil big law.

Doesn't anyone else think there is something wrong with the notion that public interest law should be "training"? Are needy people just "practice clients"? So, giant corporations deserve the very best representation, but if you're a single mom with real hardship in your life, you get some hotshot noob out of law school. If he bungles your case, hey, you were just a practice client. The hotshot will learn not to make that same mistake for the paying clients.

The same shit happens when firms oh so generously allow their newest litigators to serve pro bono time. The clients are always told how "lucky" they are to have such fine pedigreed lawyers on their case. But they do the shittiest job. Not only do they suck because they're new, but they are also so obsessed with getting back to paid matters that they always take any shitty settlement that is not in their client's best interest. When I worked for a judge, I saw these assholes at work almost every day. What a bunch of shit eaters to compromise your client's interests just because they're pro bono. They should never have taken the case to begin with if they were going to act like that. I think needy people are better off starving to pay someone who actually cares about them.

Hey dumbasses at the ABA. Yeah you, dipshits. Maybe you get rid of the third year and make this mandatory instead? Swallow your pride and realize that you are needlessly screwing over law students with a 3rd year of useless classroom education and an extra 50k in debt just to have a higher barrier to entry. And don't give us that b.s. about trying to make better lawyers, because if you really cared about that, you wouldn't accredit 200 law schools including online law schools. You don't give a s hit about the consumer: you are just perpetuating your beurocracy so that you can all keep you cushy jobs since you haven't really practiced law in 30 years, you out of touch hacks. Save some of your future fellow lawyers some time and give them some real experience with a 3rd year clinic, a holes.

53 -- Um, please don't talk about something you don't know about.

My job has become screwed up thanks to work being given to these "fellows." My department is required to give them good work so it looks like they are doing interesting things. And then there is nothing left for the rest of us. And we are the ones who actually WANT to do this job as a career.

But thanks, really, for telling me how this is good.

I think it is ridiculous that firms are paying people 60k and more for a year of doing anything other than working for the firm. They should have just rescinded offers or deferred without pay if necessary, like the rest of the corporate world would do. Firms are businesses, for God's sake.

I agree completely with everyone who posted that deferring Biglaw new hires into PI jobs should not continue. This idea takes the PI jobs away from people who really want to be in this field because a PI office will always be happy to take on the 4.0 GPA Biglaw kid instead of a graduate who has a true interest in PI but not a 4.0
Also, 55 touches on the real problem that the Biglaw system just does not work effectively to train new lawyers. ABA should make a 3rd year clinic/field/apprenticeship mandatory. And if there aren't enough lawyers willing to take on 3rd years and have them gain experience, then maybe we have too many law schools. The ABA should take advantage of the recession and rethink the way that lawyers are "taught" and "trained." Law firms and government law offices all want to hire people with experience and 3 years in a classroom just doesn't cut it.
Deferrals into PI are just the tip of the iceberg, law school is the real issue.

58--

If only public interest law were taking 4.0 BigLaw kids...in reality, they are taking the same hacks that could perform well on a three-hour test but otherwise lack any problem-solving ability or eclectic knowledge. BigLaws do not hire 4.0 FTT grads, they hire FTT grads--alpha and omega, pinnacle and barrel-scraper. This rainbow of mediocrity then gets shifted to public interest.

Which explains why this program is an utter failure. Public interest firms would never take a barrel-scraper at Cooley, yet they'd take a congruently idiotic barrel-scraper from Harvard. (Actually worse, because the barrel-scraper at Cooley at least knows he's an idiot.) Why? Because even public interest law has bought into the FTT lie that somehow an FTT degree means competence, even if that competence was woefully absent in law school performance.

Instead of ipse dixit from likely recipients of the anti-meritocratic BigLaw welfare program, I'm siding with the public interest posters who actually have experience with this disaster of a program. I wouldn't want a mine-run FTT BigLaw hack as an employee any more than a cactus in my ass.

res, you da man!

--not FTT

56-

The reason you aren't getting the work is either:

A) Your boss thinks the fellows will do a better job on the assignments

OR

B) The nonprofit will benefit long term by cultivating a relationship with the large firm for free fellows or pro bono work.

Either way, the nonprofit is benefiting. If you don't believe me, then please explain why the nonprofits would do any of this if it didn't somehow benefit them.

56-

The reason you aren't getting the work is either:

A) Your boss thinks the fellows will do a better job on the assignments

OR

B) The nonprofit will benefit long term by cultivating a relationship with the large firm for free fellows or pro bono work.

Either way, the nonprofit is benefiting. If you don't believe me, then please explain why the nonprofits would do any of this if it didn't somehow benefit them.

Love,

53

53: pwn3d by 56.

61 -- you really think public interest groups are doing this to establish long-term relationships with big firms? Come on, please. Deferred kids look at these jobs like any port in a storm. And the firms don't really care who is working where. It sounds nice that the kids would pay those PI groups back later by doing by pro bono, but all that gets dropped by the wayside when they (if they) start their biglaw career, facing thousands of hours of doc review or due diligence.

Graduate law school, get a job, then enter this conversation.

46 is spot on.

I am a deferred associate working at a public interest "firm" in the greater NYC area.

I'm not interested in litigation experience; my chosen practice area is transactional. Landlord-tenant, Social Security, immigration, personal bankruptcy, and sundry other practice areas, bore me and if graduating from law school meant one was limited to these practice areas, I would have passed on law school. The only worse practice area that I can imagine would be criminal law.

In the few weeks that I have been working, I have seen mot stereotypes of the poor - the family living on $14,000 per year, but who buy a $2500 plasma TV and now are forced into bankruptcy; the prostitute who fronted for her pimp to get an apartment lease and then conveniently turned the apartment into a whorehouse (of course, we represent her against the landlord , an elderly working stiff, who lives in the upper floor units and sees what's going on); the questionable SSI claims; and the list goes on.

A mere 10 months ago, I was out canvassing for Obama. I had worked on the campaign in four states. Now, I have become old, cynical, and angry. I see that many poor people are poor, because of a lack of discipline, an abhorrence to make a sacrifice, a willful avoidance of planning. Their complete disregard for their own best interest does constitute a right to burden the public at the public's expense.

I loathe every penny that is taxed from my deferral stipend, I imagine that it flows from my pocket to this heap of public interest dung - and I wish I could stop it.

I am a deferred associate working for a non profit until my "start date" in January. I can confirm that they are taking advantage of the bad economy by hiring people who were laid off by banks and law firms.

It's funny because I look around and it's clear everybody is using it as a resume gap filler as opposed to a permanent position. If and when the economy turns, they will lose all of this talent and will have gained nothing. very short term thinking, IMO.

And what "talent" would that be? A bunch of FTT hacks that got in to BigLaw under revolving door incest policies rather than actual problem-solving ability? Blue bloods who, as you admit, are only doing public interest to pad resumes instead of giving a damn about others.

Wow, what a pittance.

Unless public interest firms were interested in developing Ponzi schemes and evading responsibility for it, I imagine it's a good thing the egocentric, self-entitled FTTs are getting jettisoned in a couple months. It would certainly help them to not have to pay people to sit and do nothing--you know, like BigLaws do with their FTT lapdogs. And people wonder why incoming associates are getting deferred and the Am100s are laying off 10% or more of their attorneys.

If people think that taking on these deferred associates isn't taking jobs away from those who wanted to go into public interest all along, they are somewhat mistaken. Even if the economy is causing the orgs to not hire as many perm. staff, the presence of the biglaw hacks is prohibiting unemployed public interest grads to be unable to even find a volunteer position at these places.

Also, a huge part of the equation for success in public interest is PASSION, which many of these deferred associates completely lack.