Any other biglaw associates not do pro bono?

[Anonymous]

In 5 years at the firm, I’ve done only one pro bono case. Is this unusual and do others think it could be a problem? Some (many?) of my peers do a lot more, which helps fill time when billable work is slow. For a variety of reasons, I just don’t really want to do pro bono. Anyone similar? Have any thoughts about consequences?

[Anonymous]

I'm a legal secretary to partners (who vote on which associates become partner) and can tell you that it's definitely noticed and taken into consideration. So if you're aiming to make partner, you should do more.

For two years I worked for the GC (who was also a partner) and a non-equity partner who was trying to make equity. In that time the Non-E had ONE pro bono client. It was one of many strikes against him.

If you're aiming to be rich and obnoxious and completely out of touch with the working class, then avoid pro bono at all costs.

Decide your priorities, and go from there.

[Anonymous]

I don’t do a ton but I still do try to do a bit. I have young kids and I feel like any extra time I have should be spent with them right now. I do try to do family service projects and volunteer work that I can do with the kids.

Why don’t you do it? Among other things, you can get good hands on experience that can be helpful to develop your skill set. Sometimes I have issues with taking on something that I don’t know when it will end but I have been able to find discrete, one off (rather than ongoing) projects, as well.

[Anonymous]

Not all partners care about pro bono. But those who don't care won't give you points for not doing pro bono while those who do care will ding you for it, so on balance it's better to do some.

[Anonymous]

Some firms don't want their stars doing pro bono. They want them doing billable work. So maybe it is good they haven't asked you to do it or have they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not all partners care about pro bono. But those who don't care won't give you points for not doing pro bono while those who do care will ding you for it, so on balance it's better to do some.

As a retired (young) partner from DC BigLaw, this is probably true. I don’t know where you practice, but DC and SF are the two markets that do the most pro bono and if you’re in one of those then it really wouldn’t hurt to do some to broaden your support. Having said that, you’re not likely to make partner either way the way the law business is heading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t do a ton but I still do try to do a bit. I have young kids and I feel like any extra time I have should be spent with them right now. I do try to do family service projects and volunteer work that I can do with the kids.

Why don’t you do it? Among other things, you can get good hands on experience that can be helpful to develop your skill set. Sometimes I have issues with taking on something that I don’t know when it will end but I have been able to find discrete, one off (rather than ongoing) projects, as well.

OP here. For similar reasons. I have young kids and can’t/don’t want to spare the time right now. I try to knock my billable work out of the park and then I just don’t have the spare brain energy for pro bono. I have done some committee work for the firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some firms don't want their stars doing pro bono. They want them doing billable work. So maybe it is good they haven't asked you to do it or have they?

I think one partner asked me once whether I wanted to help him with something but I had heavy depositions and a trial coming up so I declined. Otherwise no one has asked me or raised the issue in my reviews.

[Anonymous]

It depends on the firm. Not doing any at Arnold & Porter while hoping to last in the litigation group would be... an error.

In comparison I don't think Quinn gives a single eff.

[Anonymous]

I only did pro bono to fill up my time when I didn't have billable work so I could make my hours. After my first year I don't think I did any pro bono work. The work in my practice area was very lumpy and when it got busy I couldn't manage the billable and pro bono work at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a legal secretary to partners (who vote on which associates become partner) and can tell you that it's definitely noticed and taken into consideration. So if you're aiming to make partner, you should do more.

For two years I worked for the GC (who was also a partner) and a non-equity partner who was trying to make equity. In that time the Non-E had ONE pro bono client. It was one of many strikes against him.

If you're aiming to be rich and obnoxious and completely out of touch with the working class, then avoid pro bono at all costs.

Decide your priorities, and go from there.

Maybe at YOUR firm but this is far from universal. At my NYC firm, definitely looked down upon in litigation by the "important" partners -- the senior partners whose views matter. They view it as time that you're taking away from actual billable work for paying clients. And if you're too into pro bono -- like take on 1-2 matters per yr or more -- you are def viewed as NOT biglaw material -- bc they've had associates in the past who just didn't care about the financial/commercial work, so they'd load up on pro bono and then when asked to take a real case try to argue that they were too busy. Not saying everyone (or even most) would play that game, but bc enough people have played that game in the past -- if you're all into pro bono, you're seen as not hard charging enough to work with the hedge fund clients. Now if it's the kind of pro bono that gets you on TV, sure exceptions are made -- like DACA, travel ban etc. -- but for the day to day divorce or housing or whatever, not so much.

8th yr -- I've done one as a 2nd yr; hated it and was actually staffed on it thru junior associate assigning so I couldn't say no (bc the associate handling it was leaving the firm, so they had to make sure someone worked on it). About the same for my peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm. Not doing any at Arnold & Porter while hoping to last in the litigation group would be... an error.

In comparison I don't think Quinn gives a single eff.

Really? Arnold & Porter?? I don't know the DC market as well as NYC but I've always thought the bigger/more reputable the firm was, the less time they wanted wasted on non billable work.

[Anonymous]

You're working long hours and have to get back to your kids and spouse. This is not n easy professional set-up to work for free, honestly, unless the firm understands that you need to cut back on the paid work, not the private life!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a legal secretary to partners (who vote on which associates become partner) and can tell you that it's definitely noticed and taken into consideration. So if you're aiming to make partner, you should do more.

For two years I worked for the GC (who was also a partner) and a non-equity partner who was trying to make equity. In that time the Non-E had ONE pro bono client. It was one of many strikes against him.

If you're aiming to be rich and obnoxious and completely out of touch with the working class, then avoid pro bono at all costs.

Decide your priorities, and go from there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm. Not doing any at Arnold & Porter while hoping to last in the litigation group would be... an error.

In comparison I don't think Quinn gives a single eff.

Really? Arnold & Porter?? I don't know the DC market as well as NYC but I've always thought the bigger/more reputable the firm was, the less time they wanted wasted on non billable work.

Not DC old school firms like A&P and Covington. They are big on pro bono.