Biglaw lateral associates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The examples you give used to be secretarial tasks. If you have people who don’t know how to redline a document or attach things to emails, have somebody show them how.

No, those aren’t secretarial tasks. An associate who’s been at any firm for more than a week should know how to run a redline and attach a document. If you can’t handle those tasks for $300k/year, how can you be trusted to do more substantive work?

Um they are secretarial tasks. The fact that no one has secretaries anymore doesn’t change that this isn’t evidence of their legal skills or lack thereof— it’s a basic tech tip that someone could explain in 5 minutes.

The standard practice when an associate turns a draft is for them to attach the doc and a redline. This is part of the associate’s job. Calling it secretarial makes an excuse for the associate’s incompetence.

So ask them to do that? Should take one time to tell them. And to the in-house poster saying she doesn't like to pay for redlining -- should the editing just be free, then?

Stop hiring laterally and start hiring "up." Meaning, hire people from lower tier firms or government who are hungry and want to make more money. Ask for multiple writing samples, and try to determine if they were co-written or edited by someone else.

Firstly, you shouldn’t have to ask any associate more senior than 2 weeks into their first year to include a redline. This is really basic stuff. This isn’t an OP issue, this is a crappy associate issue. It doesn’t require even 0.1 hours of time to do and would be covered under the time to review and revise.

Secondly, laterals are generally moving tiers already — either moving up from a lower tier or down from a top tier firm. Government lawyers aren’t ‘hungry’, they’re all former big law lawyers.

.

Inaccurate. Many are Honor Program and some of them do choose to go lateral to Biglaw if they need more money. And I promise the know how to redline and attach a document.

But most if not all hp attorneys aren’t moving their first year. At least at doj we signed a 4 year commitment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The examples you give used to be secretarial tasks. If you have people who don’t know how to redline a document or attach things to emails, have somebody show them how.

No, those aren’t secretarial tasks. An associate who’s been at any firm for more than a week should know how to run a redline and attach a document. If you can’t handle those tasks for $300k/year, how can you be trusted to do more substantive work?

Um they are secretarial tasks. The fact that no one has secretaries anymore doesn’t change that this isn’t evidence of their legal skills or lack thereof— it’s a basic tech tip that someone could explain in 5 minutes.

The standard practice when an associate turns a draft is for them to attach the doc and a redline. This is part of the associate’s job. Calling it secretarial makes an excuse for the associate’s incompetence.

So ask them to do that? Should take one time to tell them. And to the in-house poster saying she doesn't like to pay for redlining -- should the editing just be free, then?

Stop hiring laterally and start hiring "up." Meaning, hire people from lower tier firms or government who are hungry and want to make more money. Ask for multiple writing samples, and try to determine if they were co-written or edited by someone else.

Firstly, you shouldn’t have to ask any associate more senior than 2 weeks into their first year to include a redline. This is really basic stuff. This isn’t an OP issue, this is a crappy associate issue. It doesn’t require even 0.1 hours of time to do and would be covered under the time to review and revise.

Secondly, laterals are generally moving tiers already — either moving up from a lower tier or down from a top tier firm. Government lawyers aren’t ‘hungry’, they’re all former big law lawyers.

Yes, redlining is reviewing and revising, and it's not free. No one is saying to bill for attaching the document to an email.

Government lawyers are not all former big law of lawyers. [/b]Some of them are lawyers who couldn't get higher paying jobs [b]or didn't think they needed more money at the time.

.

This describes not one single Honor Program hire I worked with at DOJ.

[Anonymous]

OP sorry but getting laterals like that means your division is viewed as unappealing/dead end/toxic etc. Everyone in biglaw talks so if you are getting the lateral dregs it's because prior associates have pegged you or your division as something to avoid.

[Anonymous]

Wow, I should go back to being an associate. I have 20 years of in house experience and make less than a first year associate (and do excellent work).

[Anonymous]

A bit off topic, but does anyone have any idea as to OP's niche, in high demand practice area ?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP sorry but getting laterals like that means your division is viewed as unappealing/dead end/toxic etc. Everyone in biglaw talks so if you are getting the lateral dregs it's because prior associates have pegged you or your division as something to avoid.

That's not the issue, no. No associate outside our firm knows anything about our group. Any lateral jumping firms in year 1 or 2 is too junior to have specialized in our area yet, and won't know anything about our niche or practice group. So i can say with confidence that the problem isn't our external reputation. I also have other data that supports this.

Based on the above feedback, I am thinking it is a problem with the quality of laterals combined with my lack of time to train them. Better quality laterals could excel without the super hands on training (as shown by our homegrown associates excelling). Middling laterals could probably do decently well with a lot of training, but i'm not giving them enough. Bad laterals will obviously languish regardless. In this economy, the applicants across the board are shocking. I'm going to try and invest more time in my good associates, though it's a real challenge given how busy I am.

[Anonymous]

I am familiar with a few similar situations which occurred during the recent M&A boom in a niche practice area--cross-border/international tax matters in a cutting-edge practice. New hires were not given much direction and no training whatsoever even though the firm has a stellar reputation worldwide for training associates. The very diligent, conscientious associates only direction was to "figure it out". Had to rely on other more senior associates for any guidance, but even that was scarce due to the high workload and due to the cutting-edge nature of the practice.

A difference, however, is that OP has experienced the same difficulties even when business was not booming.

Helpful to think of "training" as "directing". With proper direction, an intelligent, conscientious associate should yield the results that you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP sorry but getting laterals like that means your division is viewed as unappealing/dead end/toxic etc. Everyone in biglaw talks so if you are getting the lateral dregs it's because prior associates have pegged you or your division as something to avoid.

That's not the issue, no. No associate outside our firm knows anything about our group. Any lateral jumping firms in year 1 or 2 is too junior to have specialized in our area yet, and won't know anything about our niche or practice group. So i can say with confidence that the problem isn't our external reputation. I also have other data that supports this.

Based on the above feedback, I am thinking it is a problem with the quality of laterals combined with my lack of time to train them. Better quality laterals could excel without the super hands on training (as shown by our homegrown associates excelling). Middling laterals could probably do decently well with a lot of training, but i'm not giving them enough. Bad laterals will obviously languish regardless. In this economy, the applicants across the board are shocking. I'm going to try and invest more time in my good associates, though it's a real challenge given how busy I am.

Maybe take on less work so you can focus on providing quality training to your associates so your practice group can consistently produce quality work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I should go back to being an associate. I have 20 years of in house experience and make less than a first year associate (and do excellent work).

But surely starting salaries in Biglaw is not news to you, and more importantly you know full well why they make more than you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I should go back to being an associate. I have 20 years of in house experience and make less than a first year associate (and do excellent work).

But surely starting salaries in Biglaw is not news to you, and more importantly you know full well why they make more than you do.

Yeah, I want to know what rock PP has been living under. There is not a single profession with more pay transparency than big law associates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You need to communicate with the associates or have someone else do it and say they need to be on the office more and have more billable hours. If they aren’t in the office more during the on office days what do you think they are doing when they are WFH. If they can’t meet targets or billable don’t let them WFH.

I don’t work in law (my husband was an associate at Cravath 20 years ago but isn’t in big law anymore) but in most other fields if people aren’t getting what needs to get done the WFH benefit gets stopped. Making $300k and working only 10-6 is ridiculous for an associate. My husband worked night and day and weekends when he was an associate at Cravath.

Sigh. Another non lawyer lawyer's wife weighing in acting as if she knows what she is talking about

I'm sure the associate logs in and works more at home that evening

[Anonymous]

OP, I am going to focus on this part of your statement:

"Our current associate can handle those types of tasks, but this week dropped the ball majorly on two big things: the first, a client deadline that had been very clearly conveyed, months and months ago, and the second, a substantive research and writing assignment that was just not well done."

Do you know what high schools these laterals went to? Because I have seen modern public suburban high schools because my kids went thru them - supposedly good ones - and they are a) not teaching kids how to write and b) teaching kids it's fine to miss deadlines.

Frankly, I would try to hire people who went to schools like Sidwell and NCS and then to top thirty SLACs or maybe HYP and majored in something writing intensive like English or History.

Public schools kids are not learning how to write and they are not learning how to meet deadlines and work hard. We sent our third kid to private after the mistake of sending the first two to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I should go back to being an associate. I have 20 years of in house experience and make less than a first year associate (and do excellent work).

But surely starting salaries in Biglaw is not news to you, and more importantly you know full well why they make more than you do.

Yeah, I want to know what rock PP has been living under. There is not a single profession with more pay transparency than big law associates.

I have often thought that at least 1/2 the people posting on DCUM threads about the legal profession are not lawyers. People who, for whatever weird reason, feel the need to play one on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I am going to focus on this part of your statement:

"Our current associate can handle those types of tasks, but this week dropped the ball majorly on two big things: the first, a client deadline that had been very clearly conveyed, months and months ago, and the second, a substantive research and writing assignment that was just not well done."

Do you know what high schools these laterals went to? Because I have seen modern public suburban high schools because my kids went thru them - supposedly good ones - and they are a) not teaching kids how to write and b) teaching kids it's fine to miss deadlines.

Frankly, I would try to hire people who went to schools like Sidwell and NCS and then to top thirty SLACs or maybe HYP and majored in something writing intensive like English or History.

Public schools kids are not learning how to write and they are not learning how to meet deadlines and work hard. We sent our third kid to private after the mistake of sending the first two to MCPS.

OP here, and interestingly, the bold describes the associate exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I am going to focus on this part of your statement:

"Our current associate can handle those types of tasks, but this week dropped the ball majorly on two big things: the first, a client deadline that had been very clearly conveyed, months and months ago, and the second, a substantive research and writing assignment that was just not well done."

Do you know what high schools these laterals went to? Because I have seen modern public suburban high schools because my kids went thru them - supposedly good ones - and they are a) not teaching kids how to write and b) teaching kids it's fine to miss deadlines.

Frankly, I would try to hire people who went to schools like Sidwell and NCS and then to top thirty SLACs or maybe HYP and majored in something writing intensive like English or History.

Public schools kids are not learning how to write and they are not learning how to meet deadlines and work hard. We sent our third kid to private after the mistake of sending the first two to MCPS.

FFS. You realize that there are 7 years of education between high school and law school graduation?