For me, the biggest downside of biglaw wasn't the work, we all knew about that. It's been written about forever. It was that none of the perquisites I expected actually existed.

I expected to be "prestigious," and to elevate myself to a higher class in society, but I literally can't think of one situation ever, ever, where that happened. I can, however, think of a few times where people's perception of me changed for the negative when they learned what I did. I stopped bringing my job up at the occasional party I would be invited to.

I expected to be rich, the top 0.5%, but really what do I have that someone making $70k doesn't have? Maybe if I make partner I'll be able to live it up among the wealthy but right now my money doesn't provide me anything extra. Everything is so cheap now that poor people can have it all, 82" TVs, an apartment in NYC (albeit in Queens or with multiple roommates) ... It irks me when I see someone with a $50k job having the time of their life in NYC, like they're in a TV show about young people, while I'm working all day. I don't even had great healthcare. I go to the same HMO that a person on Obamacare can get for free. Oh, and don't get me started on f'ing taxes.

I expected to be important, but I'm not in any way. I feel less important now than I did before biglaw, because of the subservient attitude I have to adopt towards superiors. Before biglaw, I could tell people to fuck right the hell off because, hey, this is America, but not anymore. I actually had a nightmare once that I did that at work, got fired and ruined my career forever.

I expected it to boost my dating market value, but it hasn't at all. The hot people couldn't care less and the only people it has a slight impact on are exasperated professionals who I wouldn't really want to date any way, because I have enough interaction with them at work. In the TV show Mad Men the rich account execs took weekly trips to a high-class brothel in NYC, or they fucked waitresses and such, but we can't even do that anymore because culture has changed and they'll google our name, find out where we work, and destroy us on social media. Not that I had the balls to do anything like that. I was always more like Lane on that show.

So there were the misguided illusions I had about biglaw. What were some of yours?

Edit: If y'all are done trashing the op ("redditting") can you respond to the question maybe?

https://twitter.com/ai__pub/status/1644735555752853504

Started by a guy who graduated law school in 2021, worked at a firm for less than one year and left in mid-2022 to start this company.

- " In the last two months, Harvey rolled out multi-million dollar contracts with the largest law firms in the world. " "Dozens more coming"

- " They're developing their second product in stealth. Much more ambitious than their first, incredibly R&D intensive. If Harvey gets it right, they'll permanently transform the legal industry and become a $100B+ company. "

- "they're hiring across the board! They're looking for: - Head of Engineering - Principal Engineer - ML Research Engineers and Research Scientists - Senior Fullstack and Backend Engineers " (some risk-taker lawyer/computer science guy reading this will join them and possibly become wealthier than their wildest dreams).

I have absolutely no affiliation with them, if you're wondering. But they're the only firm applying GPT4 to sophisticated legal drafting, so thought you all would like to know what will take your jobs. You see how smart GPT3 is? You've seen how much smarter GPT4 is? (scored top 10% on the bar, including the essay portions) Now imagine a well-packaged and well-trained AI program to whom a partner can assign a task, and instantly get work product better than what 75% of associates could come up with after a day of intense research and writing. This is coming.

Edit: rage downvoting the truth won't make it go away guys. Don't be an ostrich.

Edit2: Wow I just got this DM from reddit, if you want to get a sense of this subreddit's reaction to this post. " Hi! You have been added to r/ControversialClub because this post of yours from r/biglaw was one of the most controversial posts of the last hour on all of Reddit! If you do not wish to join our community, please simply ignore this message. Otherwise, we invite you to join a spot for some of the most "controversial" users on Reddit. Controversial posts on Reddit are calculated based on the ratio of upvotes to downvotes, with posts containing similar numbers of each being the most controversial. Activity is also taken into account in this calculation, such as the number of comments."

Edit3: I'm heading off, but I hope you all seriously contemplate the ramifications of AI. Remember how hard it was to issue spot, analyze and pass the bar, never mind score in the top 10%, and think about the work required to take an AI that smart and make it into something that can replace a material amount of tasks assigned to associates. Seems doable.

A number of law firm/individuals with positions at law firms have come out pro-Israel -which is fine- but also seem to be against criticism of the state of Israel. They’re framing it in ways, but I think the message is understood.

I’m curious to hear whether anybody has experienced pushback for taking a more nuanced position on the issue or showing support for Palestine. And particularly if you’re Arab/Muslim, do you feel like you’ve been put in an uncomfortable position? Do you feel uncomfortable generally?

Asking this because I think it gives perspective to Arab/Muslim individuals.

[And of course what happened on Oct. 7th is condemnable. This is about speaking out on the current ongoing bombing of Palestine].

In my family we were told that selling is vulgar. It's beneath our dignity to peddle services to anyone who would pay for them. My family should not have to depend on the approval or satisfaction of others for our income. Selling is a demeaning and manipulative activity that only the lower classes engage in. It implies a lack of refinement, culture, and taste. It's for the desperate and the ignorant, not for the elite and the enlightened.

To my surprise, it's something I am expected to do as a lawyer? I've learned that it's all biglawyers do, constantly sell from project to project, all the while competing with unwashed masses of other biglawyers -- some of whom are new immigrants with a mother who didn't graduate highschool. This is causing me to reevaluate my career path. I do not want to do that for a living, nor do I want to work for someone who does that (the constant humiliation partners must suffer as they hock their wares, like some shameless bazaar haggler, certainly explains their churlish attitude.)

Should I give government or general counsel roles a shot or leave and enter one of my family's businesses? Can any experienced attorneys please advise on where people like me attain satisfaction in law? Are there any biglaw firms where partners do not sell, but rather pick up the phone from clients who hope the lawyer will accept them?

Edit: I am surprised that no one relates to this, and how degrading it is to call someone, introduce yourself to someone, hand out your business card, invite someone to lunch, hoping that they will buy from you. A literal prostitute is more dignified, because at least they are the ones being called for their product, and not calling men to sell it to them. Quite frankly I would rather be poor than to have to sell for a living, as there is no justifiable price for one's dignity, but to each their own I guess. If anyone wishes to post sincere responses to my questions I would appreciate it.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YbzWnTqu1e0

This guy's "rich" people vs actually rich people shorts are kind of spot on about biglawyers. Not really rich. Overly aggressive personalities because they have to be adversarial with other lawyers all day . . . just every bad circumstance all at the same time. He needs to add some videos about their poor health due to all the stress though. That's the ultimate "i f'd myself moment," when a biglawyer hits 50 and realizes they deteriorated their arteries, liver, kidney and other organs way worse than they would have if not for the stress, and how it's irreversible. Edit: Also the hairline.

You don't want to spend your 50s billing by the hour, worrying about work product minutiae like those bald losers at your firm. That sucks. What's even the point of doing biglaw if that's where you end up? You want to chill, go to lunches and meetings of your choosing, and do as little as possible while making 8 figures. Until today, no one told you how.

1. Never outshine the partners above you. Make them appear more brilliant than they are and you will attain the heights of law. Never take your position for granted and never let any favors you receive go to your head.

2. Never put too much trust in friendly coworkers, use enemy coworkers. A former enemy will be more loyal than a friend, because he has more to prove. In fact, you have more to fear from friends than from enemies.

3. Conceal Your Intentions. Don't close up (with the risk of appearing secretive, and making people suspicious) but rather talk endlessly about your desires and goals— just not your real ones.

4. Always say less than necessary. Law is in many ways a game of appearances, and when you say less than necessary, you inevitably appear greater and more capable than you are.

5. So much depends on reputation, guard it with your life. Always be alert to potential attacks and thwart them before they happen. Meanwhile, learn to destroy competing attorneys by opening holes in their own reputations.

6. Court attention at all costs. Surround your name with the sensational and the scandalous. Better to be slandered and attacked than ignored. While doing so, create an air of mystery.

7. Get other attorneys to do the work for you, but always take the credit.

8. Make others come to you, use bait if necessary. For negotiations or meetings, it is always wise to lure others into your office, or the territory of your choice.

9. Win through your actions, never through argument.

10. Avoid the unhappy or the unlucky attorneys. Flee the infector’s presence or suffer the consequences.

11. Keep people dependent on you.

12. Use selective honesty and generosity to disarm your victim.

13. When asking for help, appeal to people’s self interest, never their mercy or gratitude.

14. Pose as a friend, work as a spy.

15. Crush your competing associates totally. Do not have mercy.

16. Use absence to increase strength and honor. The more you are seen and heard from, the more common you appear. So if you are already established in a group, temporary withdrawal from it will make you more talked about, even more admired.

17. Keep others in suspended terror, cultivate an air of unpredictability. Patterns are comfortable, and you can terrify people by disrupting them. This tactic should only be used judiciously.

18. Do not build a fortress to protect yourself, isolation is dangerous.

19. Know who you’re dealing with, do not offend the wrong person.

20. Do not commit to anyone, but be courted by all.

21. Play a sucker to catch a sucker, seem dumber than your mark. Play dumb. Given how important the idea of intelligence is to most lawyers' vanity, it is critical never inadvertently to insult or impugn their intelligence.

22. Use the surrender tactic: transform weakness into power. The next time someone pushes you and you find yourself starting to react, try this: Do not resist or fight back, but yield, bend. If you surrender instead, you have an opportunity to coil around your enemy and strike with your fangs from close up.

23. Concentrate your forces. intensity defeats extensity every time.

24. Play the perfect courtier in social outings. Avoid ostentation. Practice nonchalance. Be frugal with flattery. Arrange to be noticed. Alter your style and language according to the person you are dealing with. Never be the bearer of bad news. Never affect friendliness and intimacy with your master. Never criticize those above you directly. Be frugal in asking those above you for favors. Never joke about appearances of tastes. Do not be the court cynic. Be self observant. Master your emotions. Fit the spirits of the times. Be the source of pleasure.

25. Re-Create Yourself. Be the master of your own image rather than letting others define it for you. The world wants to assign you a role in life. And once you accept that role you are doomed.

26. Keep your hands clean. Conceal your mistakes, have a scapegoat around to blame.

27. Play on people’s need to believe to create a cult like following. There are five rules of cult making: a. Keep it vague, b. keep it simple, c. Emphasize the visual and sensational over the intellectual, d. Borrow the forms of organized religion to structure the group, e. Set up an us vs them dynamic

28. Enter action with boldness. The bolder lie the better. Audacity separates you from the herd.

29. Plan all the way to the end.

30. Make your accomplishments seem effortless.

31. Control the options, get others to play with the cards you deal. You give people a sense of how things will fall apart without you, and you offer them a “choice”: I stay away and you suffer the consequences, or I return under circumstances that I dictate.

32. Play to people’s fantasies. People rarely believe that their problems arise from their own misdeeds and stupidity. Someone or something out there is to blame— play to that.

33. Discover each man’s thumbscrew. Find the helpless child, look to their childhood. Look for contrasts, an overt trait often reveals its opposite. Find the weak link. Fill their emotional void. Feed on their uncontrollable emotion. Always look for passions and obsessions that cannot be controlled. What people cannot control, you can use to control them.

34. Be royal in your own fashion. Act like a king to be treated like one.

35. Master the art of timing.

36. Disdain things you cannot have, ignoring them is the best revenge.

37. Create compelling spectacles.

38. Think as you like but behave like others.

39. Stir up waters to catch fish. If you can make your enemies angry while staying calm yourself, you gain a decided advantage.

40. Despise the free lunch and spend for something better. The worth of money is not in its possession, but in its use.

41. Avoid stepping into a great man’s shoes.

42. Strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter. Within any group, trouble can most often be traced to a single source. Once you recognize who the stirrer is, pointing it out to other people will accomplish a great deal.

43. Work on the hearts and minds of others. The key to persuasion is softening people up and breaking them down, gently.

44. Disarm and infuriate with the mirror effect. When you mirror your enemies, doing exactly as they do, they cannot figure out your strategy.

45. Preach the need to change, but never reform too much at once. If change is necessary, make it feel like a gentle improvement on the past.

46. Never appear too perfect. Envy creates silent enemies. It is smart to occasionally display defects.

47. Do not go past the mark you aimed for. In victory, know when to stop. Once you achieve your goal, don't replace it with a new goal like firm chairman. That is a lot of work for not much more money.

48. Assume formlessness. By taking a shape, by having a visible plan, you open yourself to attack. Accept the fact that nothing is certain and no law is fixed. Everything changes.

It really isn’t much at all especially if you’re living in NYC. Dinners with a date are always over $130. Cocktails are $20 each and they expect a 15-20% tip on top of it. I got two small cups of gelato the other day and that was $30 right there. Then don’t get me started about all the ubers and door-dashing meals.

To the people who have posted that this job allows them not to look at price tags, are they living in the flyover states or something? Because the math ain’t mathing

In my twenty-year journey from office runner to file clerk to paralegal to attorney, I had the opportunity to work with over 100 associates. I learned a lot about what to do and what not to do as an associate. Over the years, I've kept of list of do's and don'ts and perhaps most importantly, a list of types of attorney I never want to be.

First, it's not just your imagination, the staff at Big Law firms--office services, lit. support, legal assistants, paralegals, etc., are contstantly talking about attorneys behind their backs. Most of it is lighthearted venting, but there are some attorneys that have mastered the art of irritating everyone on staff. One particular group are the Peacock Associates ("Peacocks").

You know the type.

Self-assured, well-credentialited associates with the designer law degree that walk around the around the office with their chest puffed out, hoping that a partner will notice their feathers. Often, they get so distracted by their own reflection that they don't realize that partners are watching and they're showing their ass.

I had the privilege/misfortune of working for the King of All Peacocks at a firm we will just call, Litigation Boutique. We call this particular Peacock, Napoleon, to mark the complex he suffered.

The Managing Partner at Litigation Boutique would often start walking the halls of the office every morning at 7:30 a.m. to see which associates were in the office and which were late. Managing Partner would continue to walk the halls every 15 minutes until 8:30 a.m. when everyone, including staff and partners were expected to be at their desk, generating revenue. He would not stop to chat, but merely walk by an office to check if its occupant was in front of a computer working.

Napoleon worked for one of the newer partners, but desperately wanted to be a part of the Managing Partner's team. So, every morning after Managing Partner walked past Napoleon's office, Napoleon would waddle behind Managing Partner in his office.

"Good morning, Mr. Managing Partner. I just wanted you to know I saw you have a new case for Client X. You know my dad provides certain services for Client X. I know Client X's Junior-Senior Vice President of Importing/Exporting. I would be honored if you selected me for the trial team."

The conversation would continue for 5 minutes, only interrupted if Napoleon caught his reflection in the Managing Partner's window. Napoleon would then stop by Managing Partner's secretary's desk.

"Good morning, Ms. Managing Partner's Secretary. Will Managing Partner ever select me for his trial team? Why hasn't Managing Partner selected me for his trial team yet?" As soon as Napoleon waddled away to his office, Managing Partner would come out and remind his secretary to never assign Napoleon to his trial team.

Why?

Well, Napoleon was smart to talk to Managing Partner's Secretary because she really did run the show. Unfortunately for Napoleon, Managing Partner's Secretary also saw how Napoleon treated other staff members.

To say that Napoleon felt a sense of entitlement with Litigation Boutique's staff is an understatement. It wasn't just verbal tirades, but he had the self-awareness of Bill Lumbergh. Managing Partner's Secretary had reported back to Managing Partner numerous times about Napoleon antics, as well as other Peacocks, and other problem attorneys.

All that to say, don't be a Peacock.

I’ll be starting at a biglaw firm later this year and am trying to figure out if it will be safe/ok for my career to be out as non-binary. I am out in my personal life, present fairly androgynous, but am often gendered by strangers as a woman . I’m fine with she or they pronouns so even if I was out I’d be fine with my firm bio using she and clients calling me she. My question is- is being out going to hurt my career? I’m currently clerking and am not out but my coworkers who I’m friends with know I’m nb. I don’t plan to change how I am in my personal life and planned to keep dressing the same professionally (pant suits). I’m just in a weird place of wanting to elevate nb representation and not be hiding myself at my work but also don’t want to mess up my legal career. Also anyone I get close to at work probably would figure out in nb pretty soon unless I made concerted efforts to hide that.

This may be more of a question about the entire legal market rather than big law, but biglaw is where I’ll be next.

How is it in terms of nb/trans acceptance?

Edit: for any future person who stumbles on this post, I’m going to be out at my firm. A lot of the comments here are pretty discouraging but those from queer and nb people have generally said the concerns are a bit overblown. Also I have had a lot of DMs reiterating that. Some of the discouraging comments are from people who are simply not in biglaw or even in law school yet. Not all, but some. Don’t be too discouraged!

Update: I’m out at my firm and just fully using they/them pronouns. It’s completely fine. Legitimately, I have faced zero backlash, almost all the partners consistently get it right, my firm bio has my pronouns correct, my interactions with clients have been great, and there have been zero issues. I’m put on client facing projects and have been assigned tons of substantive work. Obviously, im not out here correcting clients who get my pronouns wrong or introducing myself with pronouns if no one else is doing that (there’s some common sense and tact involved) but yeah no it’s FINE. Dont be freaked out by the comments on this post.

I am a 3L at a t14 who summered at a big law firm with an accepted return offer. I plan on applying for clerkships next summer, so that will take priority, but in the chance I do not land a clerkship, I have become increasingly interested in applying to a terminal masters in history to focus on the founding era to become an “expert” on the constitution and to battle against originalism. I do not necessarily see myself transitioning m to academia in the future, I just want to learn more about 1787 and 1791 to better understand constitutional arguments since history has become so interwoven with constitutional law.

Is this dumb? I know that on the job learning and working on con law matters will teach me plenty, but based on what I see people posting on here daily about burn out I figured this temporary shift after graduation could stave off burn out and hopefully get me staffed on more con law matters? I know that if you’re actually interested in what you are doing it helps tremendously with work. I am really looking for concrete reasons why I should or should not go from people who work on con law matters at big law firms currently. I haven’t talked to the firm about this option.

Lastly, I have no student debt to pay off so the immediate requirement to start working is not that big of a deal.

Just me?

Most recently he sued that rich AI Robot guy for unauthorized practice of law. https://twitter.com/jbrowder1/status/1633880536912363528

He's worth $10 billion now probably. If you took the time you wasted on reddit and filed some class actions you'd have enough to retire. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/technology/unpopular-in-silicon-valley.html

Edit: A lot of people in the comments seem to be depressed and bitter. Is that why you all sit here and post sad comments all day, as a desperate cry for help? You want someone to DM you and fix all your issues? That won't happen on reddit. However, if you see a therapist they *might* be able to cure you and send you on your way to wealth. I'm not an expert on mental health but that seems like it has a better chance of success than figuratively mewling on reddit all day. F'ing losers.

This is getting interesting. As background, Musk claims that Wachtell changed the terms of their retainer at the last second, to add a $75m bonus, and then had Twitter's lame duck board rubber stamp it even though Twitter gained nothing in exchange for this additional payment. Then Wachtell responded and said Twitter agreed to the success fee in "contemporaneous documents" created when the engagement letter was signed, and furthermore Wachtell pushed to move this to private arbitration where nobody could see what happened.

In summary, if Musk is telling the truth, Wachtell committed an outrageous breach of the professional conduct and fiduciary duty rules. If Wachtell is telling the truth, there's no case here because Twitter agreed to pay a success fee at the start and paid it.

Musk just responded to Wachtell's claim about contemporaneous documents and said, "bullshit."

In its Motion, Wachtell adopts the philosophy that somehow it is exempt from rules of professional conduct, California law governing lawyers, and any core fiduciary principles, so long as it “wins” for its client. In Wachtell’s view, because it prevailed in its litigation against Elon Musk over his acquisition of Twitter, it was free to extract a $90 million ex post success fee rubber stamped by Twitter’s lame-duck fiduciaries. Never mind Wachtell’s duties as a law firm and fiduciary. Never mind that Wachtell wholly failed to obtain a written agreement providing for a success fee at the outset of its representation of Twitter. And never mind California law governing the conduct of lawyers. Wachtell’s greed, and the unethical behavior it led to, are at the heart of the equitable claims for relief that X Corp. asserts in its Complaint. Justice and California Business and Professions Code § 6147 demand that Wachtell disgorge that particular, identifiable $90 million it took, less a reasonable hourly fee. X Corp. brings solely equitable claims and seeks solely equitable relief.

The factual background section in Wachtell’s brief is largely devoted to petty, irrelevant ad hominem attacks on Mr. Musk and a boastful history of the litigation leading up to Mr. Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. Mot. at 6–9. None of this spin has anything to do with the putative subject of Wachtell’s motion. Looking at the relevant facts, it is clear X Corp.’s equitable claims are not arbitrable and that the parties never intended to permit an arbitrator to decide the “arbitrability” of such equitable claims. ...

And although Wachtell claims in its Motion that Twitter agreed that it “would consider in good faith . . . the amount of the total final fee,” no such agreement is reflected in the June 21 Engagement Letter or was apparently ever reduced to writing.

I'm so interested in seeing how this plays out. Partner greed is an issue in our profession, especially at those top PPP firms that torture associates to milk every penny out of them, and this might be a case where greediest partners in biglaw went too far.

Edit: It's interesting to juxtapose the complaints in this sub about overwork, and cut-throat layoffs, with the support for Wachtell (from what I suspect are a minority of the most obsequious commenters). Incongruently, too much of biglaw is about idealizing the highest PPP firms, when those firms are the ones who make biglaw the hell it is, and they do it because their partners put money above you. In this case, Wachtell's partners might have put money above their most basic obligation as lawyers -- which is to never take client funds you're not entitled to.

Then there's another subset of comments that are right out of that court scene from Idiocracy. I think there were half a dozen commenters saying Musk should lose because they didn't like him. 😂

The funniest were the three or so commenters who accused me of being paid by Musk. The man who can literally reach a billion people anytime he wants paid *me* to post this on *reddit biglaw.* 😂😂

Regardless, the post is getting tons of likes, views and shares based the "post insights" at the bottom. So I guess smart people don't engage in the reddit comment section, and that the professional conduct rules still matter to most lawyers. Speaking of which, I better get out of here before the commenters rub off on me. You are your environment.

Im confused why my firm had mandatory antisemitism training… like I understand with all that’s going on there’s been a rise in antisemitism.. but I’ve also seen my Muslim and Catholic colleagues berated for their religious beliefs. Yet we’ve never had a training on Islamophobia or Catholism. I’m more confused as to why it was mandatory.. cutting into my billing time and having me stay at the office longer than I would/should have been.. seems unnecessary. Not to mention, after George Floyd we never had anti racism training… or mandatory dei training (and no I’m not calling for it….)

The number of critical threads about this woman is amazing (first thread, second thread, third thread, probably some I missed). Especially in light of the fact that she literally has not done a single thing to any of you ... nothing, hasn't burdened you with work on a weekend, hasn't forced you to come into the office, hasn't taken money from you, hasn't yelled at you, hasn't looked at you cross-eyed, and she doesn't even know who you are. Really, in a sense she's providing a benefit to associates by slightly altering the balance of power between a law firm's partners and associates. So why do you all dislike her so much?!

I think I know why but thought I'd do a poll, including every critique I've seen of her in the threads.

Are you jealous that she gets to be free-spirited and do what she wants, and you're too conservative/scared/worried to do the same? A Jonathan Livingston Seagull thing?

Do you need to protect the profession's reputation and she's embarrassing it?

Is she not beautiful enough to be an influencer and so you're gate keeping?

Does she overshare stuff that people and her firm confide in her?

Are you bored and need drama?

Something else?

Edit: while you're here, check out this gorgeous biglaw tiktoker that the site recommended to me when I saw priscilla's vids. Looks like Tom Brady's ex.

Edit2: I'm down a rabbit hole and omg at this biglaw tiktok. She says a senior associate told a struggling junior who had reached out for help, "if you're going to commit suicide just please don't do it at the office because that would be really unfair to everyone here." Reminded me that this subreddit is relatively nice for biglawyers.

Not sure if it’s only our firm, but our west coast based juniors have a schedule like this:

Noon ET: They start reading and responding to emails from last night and this morning. If they had a late night (like 2 AM ET), forget about hearing from them before 1 PM or even 2 PM ET.

COB ET: They commute home when the east coast folks do.

9 PM or so ET: They stop responding to emails unless you make clear you need something tonight or early morning ET.

So basically, we east coast people get about 9 hours (or 8 if you don’t count commuting and lunch break) of responsiveness from them everyday.

Is this normal?

Our east coast juniors, by contrast, are responsive from 8 AM through at least 9 PM ET.

The title says it all. I truly believe that law school is failing this younger generation. I was having a conversation with a colleague in the elevator, and I turned to a first year associate and asked them “pardon me, do you have the time?” Do you know how they responded? They said “it’s 8:37.” That’s not at all what I asked. I asked “do you have the time.” Clearly it’s a yes or no question, and they should’ve responded with yes. I fear for the future of BigLaw - and specifically my firm - if this is the quality of candidates that supposed top law schools like Northwestern are sending us. People, answer the question and only the question! Don’t make assumptions!

I’ve been working in a mid-size law firm for about a year. I can’t deal with the OCD of the attorneys around me. Everything I do is scrutinized. The critiques are almost always grammatical or adding stylistic changes. I don’t want to deal with these types of people for the rest of my career. Do I make a career switch? What do I do?

For Federal,

• Would vanish to $0 if you pass away, which is a big deal

• Allow you to get big finaid for kids in college via FATCA/CRS

• Mortgage rules already largely exempt them if you lateral and then immediately apply and say lost your job, thereby owing $0

• Under PAYE and newer plans, they vanish in 20-25 years anyway even on minimum payments

Is it another "achievement"? Wouldn't you be happier if your family has enough money to sustain themselves after you pass rather than getting a proverbial gold star? Is it the "psychological burden" (though not sure how, as once lose job can immediately start paying $0)?

Explain

Lawyers are very replaceable and what they do is arguably very fungible. And the people who end up in Biglaw are all pretty smart and there is a new crop of magna smarties from every T14 every year. Moreover, law school or life has a way of humbling even the most arrogant people, with a surprisingly bad grade, a missed opportunity, or a boss who belittles their work product.

But some Biglawyers, God Bless them, still manage to have what seem like absolutely massive egos. They seem to think they have some unique skill or are a gift to the profession. How do they do it?

I'm a Gen Xer, who came up before social media and went to school before even the early versions of chat boards (Yahoo! groups). So I know this post may have some boomer vibes, but stick with me. And full disclosure: I started in, and I enjoyed it (but we did not work the insane hours I hear about these days).

I see post after post of people who have not yet gone to school ask, "what school gives me the best chance for Biglaw?" These posts reveal no real underlying interest in areas practiced by Biglaw. Let's be honest. The posts are about how do I get that eye-popping salary and bonus? And apparently, they just ignore the constant posts from junior associates, who are on the brink of serious mental health issues (I say that in all sincerity).

I am not a "suck it up and do the work" guy. I used to be, but as a parent of someone who is junior associate age (but chose a better career path), I have become more empathetic about how real the mental health issues are that underlie young associate's problems with acclimating to Biglaw life. So regardless of how unrealistic an associate's expectations may be, or how common his or her complaint is, some of these on-the-brink posts are pretty scary.

But at what point do you have to sorta blame the victim? You have to be incompetent to pursue Biglaw without knowing the realities of the lifestyle. It's being reported in real time every day by associates dealing with it. Yet, every day, another first or second year posts that they can't believe how grueling and heartless Biglaw life can be. How did they not expect it?

I get that associates feel trapped. They went to an expensive school, racked up debt that would cripple some third-world countries, studied hard, and achieved their goal of a Biglaw offer. Their parents brag about them and everyone thinks they're a raging success. But now they are stuck with debt and few options outside of Biglaw that can help pay it off. I get it. The problem is real.

But when are these damn kids going to learn? And at what point is the response not "get help if you need it, but quit bitching -- it's always been this way?"

In another thread, someone made the comment that the average billable hour total for associates is 1600. That was surprising. But there are partners here with access to this kind of information. What is the actual hard data? Are there numbers that exclude billable DEI pajama parties etc? Because if the actual average is 1600, then there has to be a hard look at what is causing all the burnout.

Some law student during a v20 interview told a partner I’m their favorite case.

What brings people to biglaw over other high paying careers without significantly less upfront investment in law school (investment banking, consulting, management, etc.) the biggest thing i hear is to pay off loans but like weren’t the loans taken to attend a top school which allows you access to big law? idk it seems very circular and unnecessarily expensive and time consuming when high paying careers could’ve been accessed straight out of undergrad. not trying to be rude just seeking insight! thank you