Arrogant Biglaw associates applying for fed jobs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP sounds like a mean girl to me seeking revenge on people who went to top schools.

If you cannot help him, just let him know OP so he can move on to someone who can. Try being decent during the holiday season.

I went to crappy state law school and have enough influence/power to help people regardless of where they went o school. I don't begrudge the Harvards of the world.

OP here. I guess my rant came off a little too ranty, but I was actually extremely nice and gentle with this person during our conversation. And I am genuinely happy to help in how I can, including reviewing and providing feedback on his resume and passing it along when I can. His attitude is what threw me off.

Has he just started his job search? He’s in for a rude awakening but he’ll learn soon enough. I don’t know where this guy went to school. I want to bottom of T14. But I have a lot of friends who went to places like Harvard and yell and in my experience they can have a lot of attitude. They can be very entitled not just about jobs they get, but also on what they work on once they’re there. They’re very into getting “good work.” Whereas people from my school were more just glad to have a job and would suck up and do a broader variety of things.

Hilarious. Why not just say "number 14"? Or rather, why not say that you went to a top 25 school? I'll tell you why - it's because you want to make very, very clear that you didn't go to schools 15-25.

NP but actually you’re wildly off base. As weird as it is, this is the convention for law schools. T3, T6, T10, and T14 are the tiers. It’s odd but lawyers get it.

I'm not really T10 is a tier, but other than that, I agree. T14 is typically the cutoff for "national" law schools, or in other words a school that places its graduates across the country.

I’m the one who wrote the typo-laden comment saying I went to a school at the bottom of tier 14. The reason not to say the exact school is to not identify myself and I’m also actually not sure exactly which number my school is right now.

As several other commenters have said, the different tiers of where you went to law school affects hiring. Thus it is relevant to this thread. Someone who went to a tier 3 or tier 6 school is going to have spent his law school and early career having a lot easier time finding a job. And often being wined and dined. That can create a level of arrogance and entitlement and more surprise when they have trouble figuring out what to do when they need to leave the law firm. Whereas people in my tier of law schools had to work harder and hustle more to get the same jobs. At the same time, we can sometimes get the same jobs as T6 and thus be more likely to interact with those people than people who are bottom of tier 25.

It’s all totally stupid and elitist because we all learn the same things in law school anyway, but hiring can be very elitist in the legal world. So which tier your law school was does affect your perspective and experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP sounds like a mean girl to me seeking revenge on people who went to top schools.

If you cannot help him, just let him know OP so he can move on to someone who can. Try being decent during the holiday season.

I went to crappy state law school and have enough influence/power to help people regardless of where they went o school. I don't begrudge the Harvards of the world.

OP here. I guess my rant came off a little too ranty, but I was actually extremely nice and gentle with this person during our conversation. And I am genuinely happy to help in how I can, including reviewing and providing feedback on his resume and passing it along when I can. His attitude is what threw me off.

Has he just started his job search? He’s in for a rude awakening but he’ll learn soon enough. I don’t know where this guy went to school. I want to bottom of T14. But I have a lot of friends who went to places like Harvard and yell and in my experience they can have a lot of attitude. They can be very entitled not just about jobs they get, but also on what they work on once they’re there. They’re very into getting “good work.” Whereas people from my school were more just glad to have a job and would suck up and do a broader variety of things.

Hilarious. Why not just say "number 14"? Or rather, why not say that you went to a top 25 school? I'll tell you why - it's because you want to make very, very clear that you didn't go to schools 15-25.

How’s that law degree from GW working out for ya?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP sounds like a mean girl to me seeking revenge on people who went to top schools.

If you cannot help him, just let him know OP so he can move on to someone who can. Try being decent during the holiday season.

I went to crappy state law school and have enough influence/power to help people regardless of where they went o school. I don't begrudge the Harvards of the world.

OP here. I guess my rant came off a little too ranty, but I was actually extremely nice and gentle with this person during our conversation. And I am genuinely happy to help in how I can, including reviewing and providing feedback on his resume and passing it along when I can. His attitude is what threw me off.

Has he just started his job search? He’s in for a rude awakening but he’ll learn soon enough. I don’t know where this guy went to school. I want to bottom of T14. But I have a lot of friends who went to places like Harvard and yell and in my experience they can have a lot of attitude. They can be very entitled not just about jobs they get, but also on what they work on once they’re there. They’re very into getting “good work.” Whereas people from my school were more just glad to have a job and would suck up and do a broader variety of things.

Hilarious. Why not just say "number 14"? Or rather, why not say that you went to a top 25 school? I'll tell you why - it's because you want to make very, very clear that you didn't go to schools 15-25.

NP but actually you’re wildly off base. As weird as it is, this is the convention for law schools. T3, T6, T10, and T14 are the tiers. It’s odd but lawyers get it.

I'm not really T10 is a tier, but other than that, I agree. T14 is typically the cutoff for "national" law schools, or in other words a school that places its graduates across the country.

I’m the one who wrote the typo-laden comment saying I went to a school at the bottom of tier 14. The reason not to say the exact school is to not identify myself and I’m also actually not sure exactly which number my school is right now.

As several other commenters have said, the different tiers of where you went to law school affects hiring. Thus it is relevant to this thread. Someone who went to a tier 3 or tier 6 school is going to have spent his law school and early career having a lot easier time finding a job. And often being wined and dined. That can create a level of arrogance and entitlement and more surprise when they have trouble figuring out what to do when they need to leave the law firm. Whereas people in my tier of law schools had to work harder and hustle more to get the same jobs. At the same time, we can sometimes get the same jobs as T6 and thus be more likely to interact with those people than people who are bottom of tier 25.

It’s all totally stupid and elitist because we all learn the same things in law school anyway, but hiring can be very elitist in the legal world. So which tier your law school was does affect your perspective and experience.

This thread has become completely derailed and inane, but I will go ahead and add that the "T" before the various numbers stands for "top", not "tier."

[Anonymous]

I am a nothing-special general litigation BigLaw attorney about to enter my sixth year. I grew up wanting to work for the government, but went BigLaw for the money. My firm is nightmarish but figured I might as well stick around and get $$$ for maternity leave, and now have been here longer than I ever planned. This thread terrifies me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a nothing-special general litigation BigLaw attorney about to enter my sixth year. I grew up wanting to work for the government, but went BigLaw for the money. My firm is nightmarish but figured I might as well stick around and get $$$ for maternity leave, and now have been here longer than I ever planned. This thread terrifies me.

I'm sorry PP. This thread is bonkers. You will be fine!!!! Whether or not you end up wanting to leave. Having read this thread, I am grateful that I went to a low ranked law school, am not an A-hole like the OP and the big law associate he's talking about...oh, and I still make $$$ in big law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a nothing-special general litigation BigLaw attorney about to enter my sixth year. I grew up wanting to work for the government, but went BigLaw for the money. My firm is nightmarish but figured I might as well stick around and get $$$ for maternity leave, and now have been here longer than I ever planned. This thread terrifies me.

It's a lot about attitude. I think that a poster made a good point, especially the bolded:

If I were a biglaw attorney applying for federal jobs, I would just do whatever I can to show interest, knowledge, and experience relevant to the specific office and position. And just be mindful of the fact that, at least in my office, we have quite a few career feds who are going to be sensitive to your demeanor and reasons for applying. I know others in my office get down on candidates when it's clear they just want or need out of biglaw, and/or feel that we would be lucky to have them by virtue of their biglaw experience. Federal hiring is such a slog, no one wants to invest time hiring and developing someone who is just using this as a temporary landing spot.

But it's also true that general litigation won't get you all that far; try to develop some depth in a substantive area of the law.

[Anonymous]

This is not a surprising response. AT. ALL. Post again when something truly put of the ordinary happens. And expect similar calls on the daily, dude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a nothing-special general litigation BigLaw attorney about to enter my sixth year. I grew up wanting to work for the government, but went BigLaw for the money. My firm is nightmarish but figured I might as well stick around and get $$$ for maternity leave, and now have been here longer than I ever planned. This thread terrifies me.

Tradeoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a nothing-special general litigation BigLaw attorney about to enter my sixth year. I grew up wanting to work for the government, but went BigLaw for the money. My firm is nightmarish but figured I might as well stick around and get $$$ for maternity leave, and now have been here longer than I ever planned. This thread terrifies me.

Don't be scared, but take the federal job search seriously. It took me roughly a year of applying and maybe 30-50 targeted applications to get an offer (which I turned down... hope I don't regret it!). Agencies will almost always favor someone with relevant experience over someone with generic biglaw credentials, and given how long it takes to fill vacancies, they really don't want to hire someone who leaves in three years. If you envision applying for lit-oriented positions then try to get depo experience and such; I don't think being a senior associate is harmful unless you've done nothing but doc review and drafting discovery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP had me until, "And that it takes them 5+ years in biglaw to get the same level of responsibility that we give to first year honors attorneys at my agency." I doubt that is true. It certainly is not at my agency. OP should also realize that what she does is not all that unique. In my experience, I know I can train anyone, so academic credentials are important to me.

It's true at my agency. Honors Attorneys in my component go straight into the courtroom. I first-chaired my second trial. And because we can't staff cases like Biglaw does, a couple of attorneys are doing everything -- drafting, discovery, appearing in court, etc. The only people who get hands-on experience that fast are JAG attorneys and public defenders.

It's true at my agency as well. It's why he hire so few honors attorneys (2 a year max per divison). We know we all have to be available to train and help the new attorney learn as fast as possible.

[Anonymous]

Its HYP or T14. The rest only exist in people's ego fever dreams.

[Anonymous]

I do feel sorry for Big Law general litigation attorneys thinking they are a hot commodity. Some do very well as trial attorneys at DOJ and the like, but most agencies and SROs - especially the ones paying higher salaries - really want folks with discernible subject-matter expertise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its HYP or T14. The rest only exist in people's ego fever dreams.

P has no law school. If you want to be snarky, check your facts. OP sounds like a mean, miserable person to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I am guessing you went to a mid-tier law school and are now gleeful about telling the Duke guy to "take a number".

Maybe. But I've seen the same thing, and I went to a T14 and did my federal appellate clerkship. There are some (not all) Biglaw people who have bought into the idea that they are amazing just by virtue of working at a Biglaw firm, when the reality is that they often have less practical and relevant experience than someone from the JAG Corps or the public defender's office. I had more trial responsibilities my first year as an Honors Attorney than my Biglaw friends got in a decade. We routinely get hundreds of applications for lateral openings, including many highly qualified people. Thinking you're a shoe-in is pretty much always delusional.

I’m sorry, but you should know that it’s “shoo-in,” T14 person.

[Anonymous]

The issue for me is that some Big Law associates have bought into the idea that because they’ve been making more money than other lawyers, their work has been of higher value. This is an obvious logical mistake, as it’s obvious to anyone paying attention that BigLaw attorneys make more money because they work for clients with deep pockets (and also work very long hours). Clearly there are many lawyers who make less money but do high level work of great value. Including, obviously, many government attorneys.

I think BigLaw associates sometimes get it in their heads that employers outside of BigLaw will feel honored that they “gave up” the big salary to come work there. But those of us outside of firms know that associates in year 6 or later don’t really get to choose whether they give up the money. They are partner track or not. And the people who genuinely have a shot at partner and decide to go elsewhere aren’t often just applying for open government jobs.

That’s not a knock on folks in this situation— I’m sure many are capable people who would go fine at an agency job. But you need to u d’état and that no one is confused about the situation. The world is not filled with wide eyed law students or first year attorneys who will be impressed by your firm’s name or you last year’s bonus.