The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
New AmLaw Midlevel Associate Survey
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:13 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Average Hours Worked Per Week:
Wachtell: 69.1 Cravath: 65.7 S&C: 65.0 DPW: 62.7 STB: 61.4 Paul Weiss: 59.8 Cleary: 58.2 Debevoise: 57.9 Skadden: 57.0
Survey results are across all offices, response rates are low, etc etc etc
http://www.americanlawyer.com/ http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?hubtype=Cover+Story&id=1153904735215
|
 |
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:21 AM Author: Ivory embarrassed to the bone turdskin Why the fuck do t6 law school students think its "more prestigious" to work more hours (i.e. Cravath) to take home less pay (NYC COL)?
endlesspursuitofprestigeoverlifesatisfactionorrationalfinancialconsiderationspw3nd
|
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:24 AM Author: violet jewess because they want to have good options when they quit their firm and go work at a less prestigious firm (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350256) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:32 AM Author: Ivory embarrassed to the bone turdskin sigh I'll probably do the same thing when it comes my turn : (
It's OK though. I also plan to have a midlife crisis at some point and move to montana. I'll buy a big fucking ranch and a pickup truck and just do outdoorsy things / read / write.
|
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:19 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor This was pretty funny. Realitypwn3d. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352054) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:25 AM Author: Adulterous Hot Indirect Expression Wow, anti-skadden trolling will have to slow down - those hours aren't bad at all. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350271) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:30 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor The skeptics will point out that Skadden (unlike the other firms on this list) has fairly large branch offices in other cities. However my general understanding is that the hours there are not worse than at other firms and that it's pretty easy to lay low and bill the minimums if you so choose. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350327) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:26 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface I thought they did not have stated minimums (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352084) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:28 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor I think you need to do something like 1800 to get the bonus. There was a number being thrown around the Greedy boards before. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352093) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 3:28 PM Author: ultramarine razzle brethren blood rage Subject: 1600 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6849304) |
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:33 AM Author: Charcoal Know-it-all Point wtf post some more shit i dont have a log in there (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350364) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:50 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor I personally think that except for hours billed/worked, most of the info on there is pretty useless. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350553) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:53 AM Author: Adulterous Hot Indirect Expression yea, i mean, does circling a 5 instead of a 4 on "firm a good place to work?" really mean anything? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350577) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:13 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Maybe if everybody at one firm circled 5, and everybody at another firm circled 4, you could infer something from that. But as it is, you have responses from 20 or so people at an office of several hundred, and there's no info about how the scores are distributed among the respondents. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350742) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 3:34 PM Author: pearl fragrant azn This has to be the most hilarious post I've ever seen on xoxo where every poster worships the US NEws for that exact type of survey.
|
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 3:36 PM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Law schools are much more fungible than law firms. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6849338) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:07 AM Author: Spectacular brindle school Wow. 69 hours a week on average?!? Fucking insane. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350695) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:18 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Wachtell was 71.1 last year, and Cravath 69.8. http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1127898310735 |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:07 AM Author: motley abode digit ratio O'Connor: Lawyers 'unhappy lot' By W. DALE NELSON Star-Tribune correspondent March 17, 2004
LARAMIE -- Today's lawyers are "an unhappy lot" and many of them wish they had gone into some other line of work, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor told an overflow audience in a University of Wyoming concert hall Tuesday.
Speaking as the inaugural lecturer in a College of Law series on ethics and professionalism, O'Connor said ethical standards have declined since she went to law school in an era when people "trusted and respected" lawyers.
"Job dissatisfaction among lawyers is widespread, profound and growing worse," she said. Studies have shown that lawyers are three times as likely as those in other professions to suffer depression, and that drug dependency, divorce and suicide are also significantly more common among them, she told the audience.
A California study showed lawyers to be "profoundly pessimistic about the future of the legal profession" and found that only half said they would enter the profession if they had it to do over again, she said. Similarly, at the 30th anniversary of her Stanford Law School class, "the vast majority" said in response to a question that they would not do it over again if they had the choice to make.
In films, she said, lawyers are depicted as "bad people and bad professionals, unethical, disloyal or incompetent, and not too many Americans even remember that our society once actually trusted and respected lawyers."
"I think the decline of professionalism is partly responsible for this state of things," O'Connor said.
"Lawyers have to do more than know the law and the arts of practicing it," the justice said. "A great lawyer always remembers the moral and social aspects of an attorney's power and position."
"It has been said that a nation's laws are an expression of its highest ideals," said O'Connor, "while the conduct of some lawyers in the United States has sometimes been an expression of its lowest."
"A win-at-all costs mentality sometimes prevails," she said. "Many attorneys believe that zealously representing their client means pushing all the rules of ethics and decency to the limit.
"In contemporary practice, we often speak of our dealings with other lawyers as war, and act accordingly. But we ought not to look at litigation as war, or arguments as battles, or a trial as a siege."
"Civility is not a virtue that the majority of lawyers today choose to advertise," O'Connor said, deploring "the brutality of some in the legal profession today."
Carl M. Williams, a UW College of Law Graduate whose $1 million gift to the university made the lecture series and other ethics programs possible, deplored some advertising tactics in the profession. "I am put off by lawyers who come on the air and then cross over the line to deception" in their advertising, Williams.
O'Connor said she was sorry that because of the Supreme Court's schedule her appearance coincided with spring break, so that many law school students were absent. Despite spring break, however, there was a standing room only crowd in the Fine Arts Center Concert Hall, which seats nearly 700.
At a book signing by the justice beforehand, the line stretched clear across the spacious lobby of the center and snaked down a hallway to the east entrance of the building. A rough count showed somewhere between 150 to 200 people waiting. The justice's books are "The Majesty of the Law" and "Lazy B," her account of growing up on an Arizona ranch.
O'Connor, a Republican, served in the Arizona legislature and as an elected judge, was appointed to the state's Court of Appeals by Democratic Gov. Bruce Babbitt and was nominated to succeed retiring Justice Potter Stewart on the Supreme Court in 1981 by Republican President Ronald Reagan. She was the 102nd justice and the first woman to take a seat on the court.
Her appointment was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 99-0, with Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana absent. In an on-stage conversation with former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, one of the members of the Judiciary Committee which also confirmed her unanimously, she said she thought Reagan, a horseman himself, "was intrigued by the cowgirl part of my background." Asked why the Senate action was unanimous, she said, "I think they were all a little hesitant about voting 'no'" because she was a woman. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:11 AM Author: razzle-dazzle hyperventilating kitchen its b/c skadden has a big LA office, so that reduces its hours compared to NY only firms. its a sweatshop compared to the other california firms. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350732) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:14 AM Author: Spectacular brindle school What are the ave. hours like at an ave. California firm? Any idea? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350754) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:34 AM Author: talented deranged newt They all hovered around 55 to 57 hours, including Irell, Munger and Orrick. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352128) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:14 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Latham's average hours worked is 58.2, compared to Skadden's 57.0.
But, Gibson: 55.9 O'Melveny: 57.0 MoFo: 56.4 |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:16 AM Author: violet jewess I don't get the deal on latham and mofo. they both have sweatshop hours yet still manage to pull good QOL rankings (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350772) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:22 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor I don't know why you'd call them sweatshop hours. The hours are in line with similar firms. It's only Wachtell, Cravath, and to a (somewhat) lesser extent S&C that seem to consistently work more hours than other firms.
But to answer your question, it mostly comes down the people you have to put up with. Working long hours is a lot more tolerable if you like your colleagues and staff, and if the firm emphasizes that. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 1:22 AM Author: razzle-dazzle hyperventilating kitchen ratings are subjective, a lot of people like working that much, it makes em forget about their alcoholism, deprecion, etc. etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6350812) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:32 AM Author: sapphire 180 parlour 70 hours/week at WLRK? Work from 9 to 9, plus ten hours from home over the weekend? I could probably do that for two or three years before exiting somewhere that wants a WLRK lawyer. Still better hours than anyone in i-banking at VP level or below (though certainly not as much pay). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352114) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:13 AM Author: talented deranged newt What's odd is that if you look at the average salary, Wachtell's is not significantly higher than Sullivan's or Cravath's. Wachtell is at $187k, whereas Sullivan is at $186k, Simpson is at 185k, Davis Polk is at $179k and Cravath is at $181k. why would that be the case? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352397) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:17 AM Author: sapphire 180 parlour Not sure, though I think the average salary stat is probably unreliable if it averages the answers of associates at all different levels of the firm. I wouldn't put much stock in that, but it does seem suspect. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352416) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:19 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor This is why I didn't post about the other info. Reporting an "average salary" by survey is pretty stupid when it doesn't include bonus and when there is already accurate compensation info available. Maybe Wachtell's "average salary" is based on responses from 14 third-years and Cravath's is based on 22 fifth-years -- who knows? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352433) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:18 PM Author: Electric Nursing Home if only it were as simple as 9 to 9 and 10 hours on the weekend (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360908) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:25 PM Author: sapphire 180 parlour Good point. I'm sure it's more like sixty hours a week here, eighty there... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360986) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:54 PM Author: Electric Nursing Home you aren't working until 9pm on Friday if you can help it and sometimes you have to go out to lunch even if you don't want to. 70 hours a week at the call of the client means you are working, thinking about having to work or going to work the vast majority of the time you are awake (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361239) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:34 AM Author: dark titillating sandwich trust fund any DC firms hours worked? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352127) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:35 AM Author: talented deranged newt Wilmer : 57.1 Covington : 56.2 Arnold & Porter : 54.7 Hogan & Hartson : 56.0 Jones Day : 53.8 Akin Gump : 56.2
Williams & Connolly didn't participate, I guess. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:39 AM Author: dark titillating sandwich trust fund do people here really think 55-65 hours a week is a lot? i mean 12 hours M-F = 60 hours, thats not bad at all. there will be plenty of college grads making 55-65k 3 years out of college while working 55-65 hours a week. accountants at the big 4 are like that, most are probably worse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352163) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:43 AM Author: talented deranged newt I've always said 55 hours seems atrocious only to someone who has been in school for their entire life and never worked an actual full-time job for any length of time.
It's a real shock to the system to go from being in class or sutdying 35 hours a week and going out four times a week to working for 55-60 hours a week. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:44 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Not true (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352194) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:45 AM Author: sepia violent alpha Not true in what respect? I have several friends in BIG4 firms; everything stated is true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352198) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:49 AM Author: dark titillating sandwich trust fund everything i said is true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352227) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:50 AM Author: sepia violent alpha That's what I said, which means everything I said was true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352241) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:51 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface I worked at one. The accountants worked long hours for a month or two, but they otherwise worked 45-50 hours.
HTFH |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:51 AM Author: sepia violent alpha You obviously did not. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352252) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:18 PM Author: bespoke splenetic address i worked at a big-5, and billing minimums were 40 hours a week 9 months a year and 55 from 1/1 - 3/31. i don't think i ever saw a non-manager (< 5 yrs) work more than 40 a week during low season, though more senior people did work more. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352739) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:23 PM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface I was a consultant at a Big 4. These people dont know WTF they are talking about. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352759) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:55 AM Author: Domesticated contagious whorehouse 12 hours a day, 5 days a week JUST AT WORK isn't bad? Not including the commute or getting ready or work related shit? Come on.
Also, just because accountants may work those hours doesnt mean that they are good hours. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 10:59 AM Author: sepia violent alpha They certainly aren't good hours, but they aren't bad hours considering the compensation, average age of the person working, possible exit options, etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352310) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:03 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Umm that's a lot of hours. Wait until you actually have to work those hours before proclaiming it's not that bad. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352340) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:03 AM Author: sepia violent alpha I have worked those hours, or at least close to. They aren't bad. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352346) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:15 AM Author: dark titillating sandwich trust fund ive also worked those hours, not too bad. also if your making biglaw money, live really close to work. in dc i could easy be 10min away from WC with biglaw money. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352410) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:17 AM Author: milky business firm Working them now. They're not THAT bad. I think at that rate you have to make sure you prioritize so you can do what's important, and it's probably not a great schedule for someone with significant responsibilities outside of work (like kids). But it's not a rate that will completely bar an organized person from having a social life, or that will negatively affect your health. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352424) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:20 AM Author: dark titillating sandwich trust fund one of my mock trial coachs went to upenn ls and is not working at HH in dc. she had plenty of time to work with us, she only missed one of our trips due to unexpected work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352436) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:53 AM Author: ruddy aromatic stead yeah but most of the posters on this board have no life and are only concerned with prestige and money. Friends, family, and doing anything besides making money and impressing partners is irrelevant to these festering TTT posters in decline. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352605) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:56 PM Author: Mint Multi-colored Party Of The First Part Windowlicker (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361250) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:21 AM Author: Supple locus really tough guy man fuck that. i'm young, single etc. i'd work 65 hours a week no prob. i don't do it now (50 hours at a midlaw) but i could. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352448) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:26 AM Author: milky business firm Of course you could. That doesn't mean you'd like it, of course.
I don't know why positions on this board have to be so extreme - it always seems to be either "Biglaw is horrible and will ruin your life" or "Ha, if you can't work 80 hours a week and bill 75 of them you're a pussy whiner." |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:45 AM Author: Domesticated contagious whorehouse "'m young, single etc"
Exactly, which is why you should not want to work 65 hours per week. Wouldnt you want more free time now than when you're 40 and everyone your age is married with kids and there isn't really much to do? |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:47 AM Author: sepia violent alpha No, because the "free time" I want when I'm single is still available under a BIGLAW schedule (the night life baby). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352576) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:46 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Grass is always greener. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352573) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:31 AM Author: cerebral submissive crotch mad-dog skullcap Subject: PBWT looks good Patterson Belknap looks better in the AmLaw survey every year.
Can anyone corroborate? |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:58 AM Author: black beta generalized bond i can't corroborate anything, but more and more i think i want to work there (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352636) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:48 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Amlaw survey is worthless. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352583) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:50 AM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor Wait till you see all the people poring over Vault at EIP. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352587) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:53 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Explain further. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352604) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:16 PM Author: Lime razzmatazz rigor I think Vault is fairly useless, especially in the way it tries to order the firms in some absolute way. AmLaw does it too: http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?hubtype=Cover+Story&id=1153904734239 but presumably (hopefully) nobody pays much attention to this. To the extent that any firm rankings are worthwhile, I think Chambers would be the more respectable approach. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352734) |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 12:21 PM Author: milky business firm Agree that Vault is pretty useless. It does a horrible job of comparing firms in different markets, or differentiating branch offices from main offices.
Chambers is somewhat limited as well, but at least it can give you a good idea of the important practice areas and partners at each firm. |
|
Date: August 1st, 2006 11:57 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface BTW, why hasn't career services updated our subscription? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6352630) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 10:01 AM Author: bistre frozen space black woman could someone post the hours for chicago? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6359931) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 10:06 AM Author: Trip Nudist Halford International Law Enforcement Agency They don't break it down by city. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6359941) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 10:24 AM Author: bistre frozen space black woman that's odd. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360010) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 10:25 AM Author: talented deranged newt Some Chicago-based firms:
Jenner: 56.3 Kirkland: 59.9 Sidley Austin: 58.8 Mayer Brown : 59.3 Winston Strawn : 55.8 Baker McKenzie: 56.4 McDermott Will: 56.2 Sonnenschein: 55.9
Not exact, but better than nothing. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 10:30 AM Author: bistre frozen space black woman thanks. i'm a bit surprised to see winston "leading" the pack based on things i've heard from folks working there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360040) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:51 AM Author: coiffed yellow sanctuary It's leading the pack, but all of its peer firms are clustered within an hour or two. I don't think this study is precise enough that you can take decimal places seriously. If one firm is 55 and another 65, THAT you should take seriously. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360686) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:05 AM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge have any of you ever worked a full time job for more than a couple of months?
An 8 hr a day job takes up most of your time. You have got to factor in getting ready for work, getting to and from work, etc, etc. So add on an addtional 1.5 hrs to your day right there. Eating three meals, add on 2 hrs more per day. Sleeping 6-8 hrs, and you've got anywhere from 6.5 to 4.5 hrs per day left over.
Now if you work 12 hr days, you can see how little spare time you have leftover. Are you going to pick up your dry cleaning at 10:00PM? When are you going to pay your bills, go shopping, do your dishes, etc, etc? If you work 12 hr days, you will have AT MOST 2 hrs of spare time PER DAY.
Now it starts to get interesting. 14 hr days. This is a 70 hr week if you just work 5 days. You will do nothing but work and sleep. All meals will be at your desk. The weekends will be spent doing all of the errands that most people do during the week. You will have one night out per week (Saturday). You may be too tired to enjoy it.
16 hr days: you work until 2:00-3:00AM every weekday, or else you pull 14 hr days, go home between 12:00-1:00AM and work a full day Saturday. You have no life other than work. You are constantly tired, look and feel like sh*t. If you are not in a seriously commited relationship already, good luck. You don't have any time to meet someone, much less go on a date, and even if you did, he/she would think you are insane (which you might be).
This is reality, folks. It's a long way to the top if you wanna rock n roll. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:07 AM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface Credited. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360303) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:10 AM Author: Painfully Honest Kitty Coldplay Fan Geez man, you are exaggerating the situation. Even in a worst case scenario, two hours of free time per weekday plus free weekends is more than enough for a young person.
Why can't you pick up your dry cleaning while on your hour lunch break? What kind of bills are you paying that you can't pay from work on your computer? If you really think that you have to eat all your meals at your desk, then you won't have many dishes to clean, will you?
8 hours is nothing. 12 hours is a little rough, but very livable if you're organized. 14 hours is bad, but very few attorneys work 14 hours on a consistent basis. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:16 AM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge the effect is cumulative. On paper, it doesn't seem so bad. But, like all pain, the description does not reflect the reality of the experience. As the weeks go by, you get more and more tired. You lose touch with most of the people you know. You stop exercising. People stop inviting you to do things because you break plans so often. Work consumes your life so much that you never really leave it behind. After a couple of years of this, most people freak out and start looking to bail. Why do you think these firms have 25% turnover PER YEAR? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360374) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:19 AM Author: Painfully Honest Kitty Coldplay Fan These firms have a 25% turnover per year because many of their associates have never worked a real job until they stepped foot in the law firm. I have worked these hours; many people on this board have worked these hours. Law school is often the safe-haven for liberal arts kids that have never worked and have no idea what they are getting into.
I have several friends in retail. They are working 70+ hour weeks making maybe 35k just to have the privilege of working up the ladder. I have several friends in investment banking who, while having the chance to make more than I could ever make, have to work 90+ hour weeks. That's when you are unable to live.
People all over our country work 12 hour days for much less than 150k a year. Stop being a spolied brat. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:22 AM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge Look, I'm with you. I think it's a fair bargain. I don't think there's any job that pays like this to start that doesn't require you to work you ass off.
I am just posting to clue people into the reality that 60 hr weeks are not tit. It may seem so on paper, but real life is very different. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:32 AM Author: exciting tank please, get over yourself. most associates I talk to make the point that it isn't that bad - its the ocassional 80 hours weeks that suck.
You don't need 2-3 hours to eat - you can eat while you work. People still work out all the time - especially at my firm. People still do things on friday nights and weekends. Its not college, but its not considerably worse than your average job and you get paid much more. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:45 AM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge I agree that it's not considerably worse than your average job in NY. But compared to the rest of the country, 60 hr weeks is like having a job and a half.
And as long as we're comparing lawyers to other professions in NYC, you've got to admit that the other people who work similar hours often make much more than lawyers.
Again, I am happy to have the opportunity to do this and I know that things could be much worse. However, I also know many people who have been very rudely awakened by the lifestyle and do not think it is a fair bargain. Yes, many of these people do seem to be from privileged backgrounds. But so are most of the people who go to law school |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:31 PM Author: exciting tank "But compared to the rest of the country, 60 hr weeks is like having a job and a half"
Talk to someone that does roofing or who works at McDonalds for 40 hrs a week and gets paid shit. THAT is a real job.
"you've got to admit that the other people who work similar hours often make much more than lawyers"
No. Sometimes, yes. Often, no. We've been over this and over this on this board in all the Joe_Vaj threads. I know plenty of accountants who work 60 hours a week and they get paid about half what I will. lets not even start about ibanking analysts, who work many more hours, and consultants at any firm other than McKensie.
"I also know many people who have been very rudely awakened by the lifestyle and do not think it is a fair bargain. Yes, many of these people do seem to be from privileged backgrounds. But so are most of the people who go to law school"
Like I said, get over yourself. Most people can deal with 2-4 years of BIGLAW and then do something else. They may not be unhappy while they are there, but it isn't like they crumble to pieces. If you are working consistent 60 hours weeks - that's not that bad. The vast majority of associates at my V5 are mature, knew what they were getting into, and can deal with the tough times. Ocassionally you meet someone who made a poor career choice, but they probably wouldn't have been happy in any job. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:42 PM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge dude, you're giving the lecture to the wrong person. I've said repeatedly that I understood what I was getting into from the beginning and think it is fair. However, it is also true that not everyone thinks so and they are not all the whiny little babies that you make them out to be. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361139) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:45 PM Author: exciting tank ok,ok. you're right, i guess i'm just tired of all the people who bash biglaw with the "MBA PWNS JD" bullshit and I over-reacted. I'm sure i'll be bitching plenty when I'm working fulltime. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361157) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:53 PM Author: Electric Nursing Home hour lunch break?
hahahahahah |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:19 AM Author: diverse fiercely-loyal genital piercing I've worked 12 hour days in construction. The key is efficiency. When you work 8 hours, you can afford to just leisurely do things. If you're organized, and you sleep less than 7 hours, 12 hour days are doable.
The upside is that your weekends are amazing. Starting friday night you're living every moment. The work hard/play hard life-style is pretty sweet, if that's how you want to live.
However, work hard/play soft blows, and anymore than 60-65 hours a week is soul-sucking. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:55 PM Author: Electric Nursing Home farting around on a construction site doing manual labor and frying your brain stressed out for 12 hours a day doing meticulous legal shit is very different. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361247) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:56 PM Author: Adulterous Hot Indirect Expression "meticulous legal shit"
have you ever worked at a firm? |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 1:05 PM Author: Electric Nursing Home I am a first year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361314) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 2:19 PM Author: diverse fiercely-loyal genital piercing You're pretty wasted after 12 hours of manual labor ("farting around"? STFU, seriously). Regardless, I'm talking about the rest of your life outside that twelve hour work block, so your post is meaningless anyway. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361857) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 11:58 AM Author: milky business firm I think this is true...but in the 12 and the 14, there are some things the person can do to make life easier.
I genuinely don't think that anyone working in biglaw should devote a substantial period of time to housework and errands. You make enough money to outsource these functions, and should to whatever extent it's possible. Online shopping and bill pay are your friends. Get your drycleaning delivered or get before work in the morning and keep it in your office. That kind of thing. It's still hard, but you can increase your spare time each day by an hour or two if you aren't a cheapass and avoid that shit. You may also need to make your life a little simpler by living close to work or accepting that some errands may not get done.
The description about 16-hour days sounds right, though, those things blow hard. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:00 PM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge Right, I'm not saying it's not doable, I'm just trying to put things in context for the people who think, "Oh, there's 24 hrs in a day, I can work 16 hrs and sleep 8." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360751) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:02 PM Author: milky business firm Oh, that's certainly fair enough. People who regularly work 16-hour days look kind of sick, I don't think it's even good for your health at that point.
I think 12-hour days are quite doable for a person who doesn't have family responsibilities and is willing to be organized. At that point, it takes some effort to maintain a social life, but I think one is possible. Or at least I've managed to do it so far. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:02 PM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface "I think 12-hour days are quite doable for a person who doesn't have family responsibilities"
It is doable for many that do. Frankly, many (most) attorneys simply don't care. |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:55 PM Author: milky business firm Probably, though it seems a little tougher to coordinate with toddlers than with an SO or friends, if only because of different sleep and scheduling needs. But people probably can do it. You have to be kind of organized and know what your priorities are, though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361240) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:03 PM Author: bateful death wish indian lodge yeah, 60 hr weeks are fine. But every hr beyond that gets increasingly difficult (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360773) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:04 PM Author: Lake buck-toothed ratface 60 hour weeks every week would be tough for me. I have done them. I know what it feels like. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6360781) |
|
Date: August 2nd, 2006 12:55 PM Author: milky business firm Definitely agree that hours get exponentially worse the more you work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6361246) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 2:13 AM Author: arrogant cocky stage laser beams Bump. Could someone who has a subscription to law.com or american lawyer paste the rest of the survey results (or paste a link to a non-password-protected page)? |
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 3:40 PM Author: tan racy idiot subscription is free (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6849360) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2006 3:37 PM Author: tan racy idiot I think hours billed may provide a more accurate assessment than hours worked. People include time socializing and dining in their hours worked. I don't think it's reasonable to have 2 hours/day of non-social time at the firm that couldn't be billed. So to the extent that there is a greater proportion of this at some firms, it's likely because the associates desire that. May be a positive sign. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=465663&forum_id=2#6849346) |