"Staff Attorney"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

Unless, of course, you want to eat, pay rent, and keep your utilities on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the comments on here reflect either a younger associate viewpoint, or dated attitudes about staff attorneys.

Firms have been experimenting a little bit with attorney roles in the last 10-20 years, and staff attorneys, counsel, and non-equity partners are all part of that. There's actually a pretty broad range of set-ups at firms at this point.

There are firms where a staff attorney actually is basically a non-partnership-track associate. Hausfeld comes to mind. Their staff attorneys, especially senior staff attorneys, do substantive work (not just e-discovery) and can even manage teams, but they have better work-life balance and more predictable hours (and lower overall pay) than associates. I've encountered a handful of other firms like this as well, though as a PP noted, sometimes firms will use the counsel/of counsel position as the right place for mid-career attorneys who earn a regular salary, are not partnership track, but are substantive and high level contributors.

But some firms use counsel positions mostly as a stepping stone to partner, so they will test it up differently.

However, at most AmLaw 100 firms, the staff attorney role will be viewed as significantly lower status than even a first year associate. Many firms still maintain a culture where there is a strict divide between attorneys and staff (in terms of culture, status, benefits, and pay) and at these firms, it's morel likely for staff attorneys to be treated more akin to paralegals and to be viewed as less important or valuable.

So my answer to your question would be that it is highly dependent on the firm and I'd really want to investigate before I took this role. At firms where staff attorneys are low status, your position will also be significantly less secure in a volatile market, as laying off staff attorneys in a down market can be a way to conceal attorney layoffs (because industry media will focus on associate/counsel/partner layoffs).

Good job getting ChatGPT to write a response. Your first paragraph conflicts with your fifth paragraph. Your choice of Hausfeld is particularly odd.

(Different poster.)

Could you elaborate ? (Sorry, but i don't understand and I am nearly done with my second cup of coffee so not likely to get it.)

Thank you in advance for your response !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

This might have been true 15yrs ago but it's not true anymore. I suggest you educate yourself. Big Law firms have capitalized on attorneys who don't want to partner track. They make much less but bill out at much less and clients like that!!!!!! At our firm, each practice group has several staff attorneys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

Unless, of course, you want to eat, pay rent, and keep your utilities on.

This person is ridiculous. Ignore their drama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It differs by firm. I know that some firms still keep reams of staff attorneys on hand to do in-house doc review, but the last few firms I worked at had few staff attorneys and they were each tied to a practice group and trained to do work that was essential to the practice but impracticable to charge associate rates for either because it's tedious and lengthy or because performing it doesn't provide any kind of "training" for the associates. In those firms it's more like the equivalent of an associate who will not make partner being shifted to permanent senior associate or of counsel, not like an e-discovery grind.

This is the correct answer for 2024. Ignore the other poster who is posting nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the comments on here reflect either a younger associate viewpoint, or dated attitudes about staff attorneys.

Firms have been experimenting a little bit with attorney roles in the last 10-20 years, and staff attorneys, counsel, and non-equity partners are all part of that. There's actually a pretty broad range of set-ups at firms at this point.

There are firms where a staff attorney actually is basically a non-partnership-track associate. Hausfeld comes to mind. Their staff attorneys, especially senior staff attorneys, do substantive work (not just e-discovery) and can even manage teams, but they have better work-life balance and more predictable hours (and lower overall pay) than associates. I've encountered a handful of other firms like this as well, though as a PP noted, sometimes firms will use the counsel/of counsel position as the right place for mid-career attorneys who earn a regular salary, are not partnership track, but are substantive and high level contributors.

But some firms use counsel positions mostly as a stepping stone to partner, so they will test it up differently.

However, at most AmLaw 100 firms, the staff attorney role will be viewed as significantly lower status than even a first year associate. Many firms still maintain a culture where there is a strict divide between attorneys and staff (in terms of culture, status, benefits, and pay) and at these firms, it's morel likely for staff attorneys to be treated more akin to paralegals and to be viewed as less important or valuable.

So my answer to your question would be that it is highly dependent on the firm and I'd really want to investigate before I took this role. At firms where staff attorneys are low status, your position will also be significantly less secure in a volatile market, as laying off staff attorneys in a down market can be a way to conceal attorney layoffs (because industry media will focus on associate/counsel/partner layoffs).

Good job getting ChatGPT to write a response. Your first paragraph conflicts with your fifth paragraph. Your choice of Hausfeld is particularly odd.

I would be surprised if ChatGPT could come up with this as it requires pretty insider knowledge of a broad range of firms. The problem is that you think only AmLaw100 firms matter, and therefore don't actually know much about the broader range of cultures at firms outside that group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

This might have been true 15yrs ago but it's not true anymore. I suggest you educate yourself. Big Law firms have capitalized on attorneys who don't want to partner track. They make much less but bill out at much less and clients like that!!!!!! At our firm, each practice group has several staff attorneys.

I wish that option had been around when I graduated back in the dark ages. I'd have loved to settle into a comfortable role like that.

[Anonymous]

I was a staff attorney in the 2000s out of law school for a Biglaw firm. I was treated like everyone else. When I switched firms after a few years, I was hired as a mid-level associate on partnership track.

I have a friend who is a staff attorney now are a Biglaw firm in evidence/toxic tort/ document review but it is extremely specialized, he did not want to be on a partnership track, he wanted 9-5 hours and they created the role for him. He's been there I think for 15 years. He's super happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

Some people don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

Not untrue, though good associates tend to recognize that reliable staff attorneys can be invaluable.

[Anonymous]

My firm has staff attorneys who are not e-discovery attorneys (that is a different group). The staff attorneys do work that is very specific and typically demanded only by banks who pay low rates (like mortgage foreclosures and real estate stuff). The staff attorneys typically went to lower-ranked law schools and previously worked at smaller law firms. My firm does not have any staff attorneys who were previously associates at our or similar firm. Our firm has another role called “counsel” that is more like “forever associate” (i.e.: you can hang out doing your thing but not have a business development expectation.)

I don’t know about their compensation, but their billing rates are similar to very experienced paralegals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

Unless, of course, you want to eat, pay rent, and keep your utilities on.

This person is ridiculous. Ignore their drama.

Not ridiculous. Drama is real for newly minted attorneys in this crowded buyer's market.

As an example: Within the past decade, West Virginia University School of Law--a very low ranked law school--placed a significant number of its freshly minted graduates in biglaw as staff attorneys doing document review. Pay was better than almost all other options and many would have been unemployed in a role requiring a law degree and bar membership if not for these biglaw document review positions based in the state of West Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Document review as it once was no longer exits. The technology is so advanced that those never ending, year long reviews with rooms full of attorneys rarely exist anymore. The staff attorneys used to implement the technology are highly specialized. Of course there is some review happening but firms are after attorneys who know about the technology and know about cutting cost to their clients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

Unless, of course, you want to eat, pay rent, and keep your utilities on.

This person is ridiculous. Ignore their drama.

Not ridiculous. Drama is real for newly minted attorneys in this crowded buyer's market.

As an example: Within the past decade, West Virginia University School of Law--a very low ranked law school--placed a significant number of its freshly minted graduates in biglaw as staff attorneys doing document review. Pay was better than almost all other options and many would have been unemployed in a role requiring a law degree and bar membership if not for these biglaw document review positions based in the state of West Virginia.

DP, but... what? The example you give perfectly illustrates why the PP's "drama" should be ignored. Staff attorney roles are perfectly good jobs for the right candidate. Whether that's someone who went to a lower ranked school and might be struggling to find an associate position, or someone mid-career who just wants a 9-5 and doesn't care about prestige, or whatever. The PP who is saying that "the last thing" you want to be is a staff attorney, or that being a staff attorney is somehow too demeaning to be worth it (something that is also very relative depending on the firm, as staff attorneys can have different status depending on the firm and the kind of work they are assign, as well as their pay and benefits) is fixating on the fact that staff attorney roles are less prestigious, and ignoring that they are full time jobs with benefits practicing law, often with some good job security, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

The "drama" is made up by competitive young attorneys who are deeply insecure and think the prestigious of your school, position or firm is the most important possible thing. It's not.