zlacker

I work in a law firm that will fire great attorneys. It's part of the big law business model. Up or out and very few get up'd into partnership. So eventually you get fired (after 8-12 years depending on firm.)

So I know eventually my ass will get fired. It's just a matter of when.

I don't really understand it. But it's how the industry works.

Edit: 8-12 is for unambiguously great attorneys. A lot of decent attorneys get shown the door after 4-6 years. People who can't hack it (usually because they won't put up with be worked like a slave) will only make it 2-4 years. A lot of people quit.

>>rhino3+(OP)
At 8-12 years do you get paid more than a new hire? Seems a "good" way to keep costs down, having the bulk of work done by the new guys - and a few partners to oversee everything.

The downside is the average experience of your employee is going to be a lot lower, but that must not be the top goal of the law firms that employee this.

>>brianw+D
Much more than a new person. About double.

>>rhino3+(OP)
On the flip side, it seems pretty hard to get fired in the first few years (as opposed to laid off in a downturn).

>>rayine+Y3
I dunno. We had a lazy and shitty guy my year who got shitcanned after like 1.5 years.

>>brianw+D
From what I've seen of UK-based law firms, this is typical.

A young law-hopeful will face insane competition to get the relevant work experience and eventually get on a vacation scheme (2% success rate) [1]. Here they will do 2-4 weeks work with the firm they want to apply for.

Next, they need to apply again to receive a full training contract at that firm. Competition for these is even tougher (~0.5-1%).

Now, as part of the graduate intake (training contract) this person will be one ~100. Here are where well educated, nervous, fresh-faced young staff become the firm’s best workers - it's basically a two-year job interview. At the end of the two years, around 70 will be hired by the firm as new lawyers. From there another 20 will parachute[2] out per year. Of my brother's 35-person intake at a magic circle firm only two remain seven years on; many are in completely different fields. Around one person per intake will make it to the top - by this point they are the 1% of the 1% of the 1%. The entire business is structured to concentrate wealth in the hands of as few people as possible, with ludicrous hourly rates that junior staff never see, rigid seniority levels and the illusion of prestige.

Source: Brother at mid-sized magic circle firm + my own 3 months' subjective experience at two top-tier law firms before I decided to jump ship (I'm biased!).

[1] http://allaboutlaw.co.uk/law-careers/vacation-scheme/vacatio....

[2] A popular term in the field referring to the ease in which a lawyer working at a prestigious firm can move in to something less prestigious and a whole-lot more rewarding somewhere else. I met people applying for top firms with the sole intention of doing this.

>>rhino3+36
Apparently he may have gotten shitcanned after just two quarters at Yahoo!

>>brianw+D
Just one example of a big law firm in NY:

http://www.lawfirmstats.com/firms/Willkie-Farr-Gallagher/all...

Newly hired attorneys make US 160k, while those 8 years in typically make US 280k.

There's a little bit of movement if you've changed firms, but there's a good chance if you work for a big law firm you're in this ballpark.

A partner's comp is structured differently.

>>brianw+D
Most lawyer work is bog standard paperwork, and clients pay by the hour. Extra years of experience is not useful. You need a few experienced people, but mostly for their sales and strategy skills.

>>kevins+F8
If you add in bonus, it's there is an even bigger difference. This past year first years got 15k bonus, and 8th years got 100k.

combined: 175k for first, 380k for 8th years.

>>plonh+La
Some types of legal work are bog standard paperwork, but the kind of stuff the big firms tends not to be. It takes about 5-6 years for a transactional person to be able to run a small deal by themselves. In litigation it's even steeper. At big firms, most associates (even 8 years in) probably couldn't run a complex case. And the older partners just have better judgement and wisdom that only comes with doing something many times.

But with stuff like writing wills, drafting simple contracts, entity formation, patent applications, etc. tend to have a shorter learning curve.

>>rhino3+qb
To your point below, I suspect the 8-10 year person is creating more value with less supervision than a new hire. Being able to manage a project/client solo, even a small one, makes your work incremental revenue to the firm. More so if you're involved in bringing in the business....

I have new hires; they take a LOT more supervision... and our group's output is limited to the speed at which our senior folks can originate projects...

>>sixtyp+Ne
I mean I would rather have 2 10 year experienced developers than 3 brand new developers, even if the cost was the same.

But maybe law firms do not think this way..

>>rhino3+(OP)
What is the carrer path then?

>>rhino3+(OP)
So Suits is more true to life than I realised..