Bloomberg Law’s Post

🔍 The Corporate Lure: Are Young Legal Talented Minds Leaving the Field Needy? ⚖️ Corporate law continues to attract the brightest young legal talents with lucrative paychecks and prestigious careers. This exodus from traditional practice areas raises alarms across the legal ecosystem. 🚨 💼 Why Corporate Law Is Irresistible Corporate law firms offer structured careers, generous compensation, and high-stakes work. Law schools amplify this by prioritizing top firm placements over litigation or public interest, leading to talent oversaturation in corporate law. 📚 🌊 Key Consequences 1. Justice System Impact 🏛️ The shift of talented young lawyers away from litigation weakens our legal foundations and reduces access to quality representation for underprivileged communities. 2. Leadership Diversity 🎯 With fewer talented minds in litigation, we lose diverse perspectives in the bench and bar. Public interest law and policymaking suffer from this talent gap. ✨ Why We Need Young Talented Minds 1. Innovation*💡 Young talented lawyers bring fresh solutions to environmental law, tech regulation, and human rights advocacy. 2. Access to Justice 🌉 These professionals can make legal systems more accessible and address crucial societal challenges. 🛠️ Bridge the Gap 1. Financial Support 🏗️ Create stipend systems helping talented lawyers choose passion over necessity. 2. Education Reform 📋 Balance corporate focus with litigation and public interest exposure. 3. Policy Changes 📜 Develop frameworks supporting young talent in underserved areas. 🎯 Moving Forward While corporate law offers immediate rewards, we need talented minds across all legal areas. For young lawyers: align ambition with justice to build meaningful careers. ⚡ #LegalProfession 👨⚖️ #LegalTalent 🌟 #Justice ⚖️

Biglaw has a hiring problem... and it's partly their fault. As recruiting starts to happen earlier and earlier, firms don't have accurate indicators to use in determining what makes a candidate a great fit. We all know the traditional indicators already have deficiencies (law school name, rankings, grades, journals) and now law firms will need to rely on even less information to keep up with competitors that are recruiting earlier. That's the market's fault. But where law firms then make a mistake is that they tend to only explore a candidate's legal experience, which as a first year law student, should be relatively minimal. Most of these students don't know what type of law they want to do and some may have just considered becoming a lawyer less than a year ago when they decided to apply to law school. This pushes students who may be interested in law to prioritize legal internships, law related clubs in undergrad, and courses relating to law in the hopes of getting "ahead of the game." Law firms tend to be attracted to these candidates and overlook candidates who bring diversity of thought and unique experiences to the table. Many of these experiences are likely more accurate indicators about aptitude and future success than being on a particular journal. I spent eight years involved in recruiting and I only remember three candidates: - A part-time skydiving instructor. From that I gleaned a few things: good under pressure, can counsel others through life-threatening situations (akin to a bet the company suit), and has great attention to detail. - A student who created a YouTube channel for law students during COVID and gained 50k subscribers in one year: self-starter, knows how to tell a story, understands client pitches and can "sell." - A graphic designer who ultimately became interested in IP law after her graphics were stolen and monetized by someone else. When I asked her what she would have done differently know that she learned IP law? Her answer was non-legal. "No legal protection would've changed anything really, I just needed a better watermark" -- a true lawyer understands that most solutions exist outside of the law. To most law firms, these candidates "lacked legal experience." I have seen candidates rejected because (as a 1L) they were not signed up for a journal 2L. Even if they were signed up for a journal, they wouldn't be gaining that experience until after they already signed an offer! Yet firms use this to auto-discredit candidates, without considering those students may use that time instead to develop their talents in another way. Law firms need to look at non-legal experience even more than legal experience in making hires (particularly of students). A law firm's goal should not be to hire the most "legally ready" lawyer, but to hire the candidate that, with proper training, will be the most effective lawyer. And that requires looking outside the "legal experience" box. #biglaw #recruitment #legal

Important facts while choosing Legal profession:- In recent years, more students are gravitating towards the legal profession, driven by its various benefits, challenges, and opportunities for personal and professional growth. The legal field offers a dynamic, intellectually stimulating career with the potential for financial success and societal impact. Many students are attracted by the idea of advocating for justice, protecting human rights, and shaping public policy. Additionally, law offers a wide array of specialties, including corporate law, criminal defense, family law, and environmental law, allowing individuals to tailor their careers to their interests. Pros of the Legal Profession:- Job Stability and Financial Rewards: Lawyers often earn competitive salaries, particularly those who work in top firms or specialized areas of law. The demand for legal professionals remains steady, providing job security. Intellectual Challenge: Law requires critical thinking, problem-solving, and strong analytical skills, making it an intellectually engaging profession. Every case presents a new challenge, requiring lawyers to think creatively and strategically. Impact on Society: Lawyers play an essential role in advocating for justice, defending individual rights, and influencing policy decisions. Many legal professionals find fulfillment in making a difference through their work. Variety of Specializations: The legal profession offers diverse career paths, from corporate law to human rights law, allowing students to choose areas of interest and specialize in specific fields. Cons of the Legal Profession: Long Working Hours: The legal profession is known for its demanding hours, with lawyers often working nights and weekends to meet deadlines, which can lead to burnout. High Stress: Legal work can be high-pressure, especially in litigation or corporate law, where the stakes are often high and outcomes uncertain. Cost of Education: The path to becoming a lawyer often requires significant investment in education, including law school tuition and associated costs, which can be a financial burden for many students. Emotional Strain: In areas like criminal or family law, lawyers may deal with emotionally difficult cases, which can take an emotional toll. Why Students Should Be Careful: While law can be a rewarding career, it's crucial for students to consider their aptitude for the profession. The rigorous education and demanding nature of the job may not suit everyone. It requires a commitment to long hours, constant learning, and dealing with challenging, sometimes distressing situations. Aspiring lawyers should carefully evaluate their interests, strengths, and motivations before pursuing this path to ensure it aligns with their long-term goals.

Super interesting article from Bloomberg Law today. Biglaw has always gotten an early start recruiting law students for full time roles. I remember I did my OCI interviews during the summer after 1L for essentially a first year associate job that wouldn’t start until two years later. Apparently these days, that recruiting process has moved even earlier, to the spring, before 1L year has even wrapped up. I get why it’s happening. Law student recruiting is so important to establishing the firm’s brand. I mean, I still associate specific firms with who they hired from my law school class. Clients probably do the same thing. So it makes sense that these firms will compete with each other to hire "the best" students by one-upping each other. Moving first does seem to give you a recruiting advantage. At the same time, what does that mean for how "the best" is defined? Before they only relied on grades from just two semesters, and participation on law journal. Now they can only rely on the grades from one, single semester. Which happens to be the the first. This creates a system that favors those who figure out law school exams right out of the gate. I wonder if these trends will raise the importance of other factors like law school rankings and undergrad GPA. Because what other information do the firms have to go on? Problem is, these are all imperfect predictors of future success as a practicing lawyer. I wouldn’t be surprised if these trends reinforce old hierarchies and perceptions, and exacerbate some of the existing challenges in our profession. 

Which law schools are top firms hiring from? Not surprisingly, the top firms based on revenue tend to hire from the top ranked schools. The numbers by themselves shed some light on hiring practices but so do some of the nuances not shown in the graph. The graph is based on the top five schools hired by these firms based on overall associate numbers (that is top five in overall associate count and not on any school rank) Based on numbers from the website Firm Prospects, DLA Piper, Gibson Dunn, Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Sidley Austin, and Skadden take more students from Harvard Law in the aggregate than from any other school followed by Georgetown, Northwestern, and Columbia. Clearly there is an east coast bias as many of these firms and most top ranked schools are in the Midwest and along the eastern seaboard. Still, top schools like Stanford and Yale are not covered within the graph parameters. Many students go on to clerkships and other jobs and so there is a selection effect leading some to big firms and some elsewhere. Some things to note: ✔️ Outside of schools at the top end of the graph, DLA Piper has students from Notre Dame and University of San Diego in their top five schools. ✔️ Gibson Dunn has 22 associates from Fordham, 17 from GW, and 11 from University of Houston. ✔️Sidley Austin has 26 from Fordham, 15 from Boston College, and 15 from the University of Southern California There is clearly more diversity after the five schools with the most associate hires per firm and in firms outside of the top revenue generators. Firms also tend to hire from the regions where they have the largest footprint. This goes without saying but status isn't everything and many people do not or will not thrive in a big firm environment. For those who are interested in these firms though, these numbers may offer valuable insights. Once again, these numbers are predicated on the accuracy of Firm Prospects findings. If you are interested in similar data driven analyses of legal topics come by and subscribe at my Substack: Legalytics: https://lnkd.in/gq_JtsFH

More great reporting by Bloomberg on law firm recruiting and potential impact on first-generation law students. https://shorturl.at/fmsE8 "OCI has turned into a secondary hiring hub as top firms fight to round up the best students earlier than ever through direct online applications for these high-demand positions." "“There’s a structural disadvantage here in terms of the knowledge gap between people who know how to navigate the system and the people who don’t,” said a rising third-year student at the University of Chicago Law School. The first-generation law student said he applied to scores of law firms during his first year. The disadvantage isn’t binary as in being aware or unaware of the new, pre-OCI process, he said. It’s more about knowing how to best approach firms and interact with their recruiters."

In today's competitive legal landscape, law firms constantly seek ways to gain an edge over their competitors. One key factor that sets top law firms apart is their talent pool. As highlighted in a recent article from Bloomberg Law, attracting and retaining top legal talent has become a top priority for many firms. According to the article, this focus on talent begins early on in a lawyer's career. Many large firms recruit top students as early as their first year of law school, allowing these firms to identify and cultivate the most promising individuals before they even graduate. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/eabTivR5 #LegalRecruitment #LegalTalent #LawFirms #LegalNews

When my grandmother passed away, my Dad and I went to a law office to sign some documents for the transfer of her property. The ground floor of this old dilapidated shophouse was a noisy kopitiam with food stalls. We walked up the dimly lit stairs to the upper floor where a tailor with his old sewing machines mended clothes. Right to the back and next to the toilet was a small room where the lawyer provided her services. To this day, I still vividly recall the combination of aromas: hawker food, musty smell of an old building and the latrine. An extreme example but not all law firms have a fancy office as what we see on Suits. But like the rest of us they are running a business and have to pay the bills. To manage their expenses they are forced to recruit pupils to do paralegal work as those who wish to be proper paralegals would be drawn to the more established firms offering higher pay. Not all law firm owners who poorly remunerate their pupils do so with the intention to exploit. They too are “exploited” by their clients who pay low legal fees because there is no shortage of lawyers. I overhead a senior litigation lawyer saying that 25 years ago a high court trial for a suit of a certain nature cost RM200k. Today it only cost RM70k. He remarked how could this be as it would already be shocking if after so many years it would have remained at RM200k. For law firm owners, costs have gone up but not legal fees. Clients are no less demanding. Try telling the client you cannot meet their dateline because you believe in work life balance. Moreover, law firm owners have to manage junior lawyers who are equally If not more demanding. Higher pay. More guidance. Shorter work hours. More for less. Then they are gone and a new cycle of recruiting and training of new hires begin. The turnover of lawyers have a financial impact as newbies need time to be up to speed. If the revenue of the firm is not high, an increase in costs adds to that burden. Both my previous firms were at some point the market leader in remunerating pupils and associates. By paying higher than our peers, it was our intention to attract the best talent fresh from law school. But to whom much is given, much is expected - both quantitative and qualitative. Higher pay means fewer associates and pupils to share the workload. All law graduates require a pupillage position to qualify and many law firms out there require a pair of hands. It is a 9 months marriage of convenience. The established firms which pay decent pupillage remuneration offer just a small percentage of the places required by law graduates each year. If you are a law graduate and the pupillage remuneration offered is not up to expectation, why accept? If you accept because no other law firm will offer you, isn’t the law firm doing you a favour by helping you qualify? We all start somewhere. It starts with getting admitted. With the imposition of minimum remuneration, will firms reduce their pupillage places?

#UFLaw is ranked No. 22 in Above the Law's 2024 Top Law Schools rankings, which focus on the latest ABA employment outcomes. Explore the full list and rankings methodology: https://lnkd.in/eMGpAWCd

Dear law students worried about exams: Let me tell you about my 1L Con Law exam. Three equally-valued questions. One was to assess the constitutionality of a statute. Well, I read it as a state statute. Finished quickly. Went over my work. Came to that one with 10 minutes left, and realized, no, it was a federal statute. Cue freak-out. I didn't bother fixing anything with that time left, I just wrote at the bottom: "Well, that's wrong, but it's good analysis if it were a state law. Since it isn't, and I'm out of time, here are the things we should check for, with a case for each. And here's what can be used from the analysis above." I don't know how I did on that question, but I did fine in the class. Not my best grade ever, obviously, but fine. Mistakes happen, but remember - you're not the only one making them. As I said, it wasn't my best grade. So what did I do about it? Step one - if you've paid attention, done well when called, gone to office hours, and you don't like your grade in the class - and this is important - go get a letter of recommendation from that professor. A lot of potential employers, especially judges, will rest easier with a less-than-stellar grade if the professor writes something to explain it. I know I did as a clerk screening applications. Anywho, so I didn't get a great grade in Con Law. But my professor wrote me a glowing recommendation, I clerked, and now I'm one of the few people lucky/blessed enough to actually do some constitution law in my practice (after spending some time as a Con Law scholar). So remember, too, that a less-than-stellar grade in a subject doesn't mean you're done with that practice area, if you like it. It's an obstacle, but you can overcome it.