Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign
Ed. Note: Welcome to our daily feature Trivia Question of the Day!
According to data collected by ALM for their 2020 Am Law 200 ranking, which firm entered the rankings for the first time this year at an impressive 163rd?
Hint: This full service law firm has 13 offices across Florida.
See the answer on the next page.
(via Getty Images)
It’s amazing how much can change in three short months. Over the course of your lifetime, can you pick out a three-month period in which your life changed as much as it has between March 1 and June 1? Speaking for myself, I can’t.
So many things are dramatically different as a result of the coronavirus pandemic — many things for the worse, but at least a few for the better. Law firm job hunting and recruiting are no exceptions.
Here are five ways in which job searching and recruiting have changed in the past three months:
1. There are far fewer jobs out there.
Let’s start with the obvious. In the economy writ large, we went from almost full employment in March to a projected 20 percent unemployment for May (when the labor statistics come out for this month). The legal sector has not been immune, losing an estimated 64,000 jobs in April alone.
Large law firms have also retrenched, going from eagerly seeking laterals to furloughing or laying off lawyers and staff. If you’re receiving many fewer emails or calls from recruiters, don’t be offended or surprised; it’s not you, it’s the firms. A fair number of firms have implemented hiring freezes or are focusing on only high-priority searches.
2. Video interviewing: it is now, officially, “a thing.”
In the past, video interviewing over Zoom, Skype, or similar tools was the exception rather than the rule. For lawyers working abroad who wanted to return to the U.S., for example, video interviews were not uncommon, especially in the early or screening stages.
Now, of course, video interviewing is pretty much the only way interviewing takes place, thanks to the restrictions imposed to halt or slow the spread of coronavirus. And you know what? It has been fine. Speaking for myself, I have a fair number of candidates going through remote interviews right now, and nobody has had a snafu yet (knock wood).
Law firms and candidates are getting increasingly comfortable with remote interviewing. In fact, I’ve already had one candidate who was interviewed, hired, and onboarded remotely. He has been working for his new firm since late March, but he has yet to set foot in the firm’s physical offices.
The current crisis represents an excellent opportunity for firms that are willing to buck tradition and recruit remotely. These firms can scoop up top talent, while more conservative competitors sit on their hands.
3. It’s all (or mostly) about the partners.
Yes, there’s some activity in the associate market, but make no mistake: the market isn’t what it was like back in March. The associate space is much, much quieter, especially in previously booming transactional practices like M&A.
But partner recruiting remains robust, much as it did during the Great Recession. When the pie is shrinking, the way for firms to survive (or thrive) is by grabbing a larger slice of that shrinking pie. So firms are seeking out partners with big books of business, to help them grow revenue during these challenging times.
And partners are also quite willing to look around. In working on a few recent searches, I’ve found that partners at firms that have cut their compensation or that seem financially unstable are especially receptive to outreach these days.
4. Standards are higher.
This isn’t surprising. Video interviews, even if more common, aren’t the firms’ preferred way of recruiting — so if they are willing to go to the trouble of interviewing someone, that someone tends to be very impressive (or the need tends to be very dire). In a hot market, so-so candidates can get traction for various reasons, such as being in a coveted practice area. That’s not true today (yes, even for bankruptcy).
5. Firms want exactly what they want.
For the relatively few searches that are open, the firms want exactly what’s specified. In better markets, there’s usually some flexibility as to things like class year or practice area. But in this market, a buyer’s market in terms of legal talent, the firms are in firmly in control. And they’re taking the Burger King approach: they’ll have it their way, thank you very much.
These are just very general observations about the Biglaw job market today. For more detailed discussion, please join me on Tuesday, June 2, at 2:30 p.m. EDT/11:30 a.m. PDT, for a free webinar, Law Firm Recruiting During COVID-19. I’ll moderate a panel featuring three of my Lateral Link colleagues: Gloria Sandrino, who heads our partner practice; Zach Sandberg, who will discuss associate recruiting; and Craig Brown, a longtime leader in the world of temporary placements. We hope to “see” you then!
Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts from Lateral Link’s team of expert contributors. David Lat is a managing director in the New York office, where he focuses on placing top associates, partners, and partner groups into preeminent law firms around the country.
Lateral Link is one of the top-rated international legal recruiting firms. With over 14 offices world-wide, Lateral Link specializes in placing attorneys at the most prestigious law firms and companies in the world. Managed by former practicing attorneys from top law schools, Lateral Link has a tradition of hiring lawyers to execute the lateral leaps of practicing attorneys. Click here to find out more about us.
Welcome Duke to Team GRE! (Probably)
Law school admissions policies have undergone some pretty radical changes over the last three years. Once upon a time, if you wanted to be a lawyer, you had to be ready to take the LSAT. But slowly over time, that requirement has been chipped away as more and more law schools allow students to submit their GRE score in lieu of the traditional admissions test, the LSAT.
Above the Law readers are always quick to point out when a law school starts accepting the GRE — particularly when it’s a prestigious one. So it was no surprise when ATL got tips about the latest update to the Duke Law admissions page, which pretty clearly indicates the law school has joined the GRE party:
However, when I reached out to the law school for a comment, I found someone in the web design department at Duke had jumped the gun. A spokesperson at the law school said their final decision on the GRE was still being made. But, don’t throw out that GRE application just yet. According to William Hoye, associate dean of admissions and student affairs at Duke Law, the language on the website will be changed to:
Application information will be revised in late August for the 2021 entering class. We will accept the LSAT and the LSAT-Flex; we expect to be able to accept the GRE as well.
So there is a pretty good chance prospective Dukies can avoid the LSAT after all. And assuming Duke does make the change for the next admissions cycle, the only T14 law schools still holding onto the LSAT as the exclusive method for admission are Stanford and Michigan. We’ll see how long that lasts…
The list of law schools that currently accept the GRE for admissions:
And remember that survey by Kaplan Test Prep from 2017 that said a full 25 percent of law schools have plans to accept the GRE? Yeah, we’ve hit that threshold. And it’s a popular move. Another Kaplan study determined 49 percent of students surveyed support the move to the GRE.
Even though more and more law schools are on board with the GRE, the body responsible for law school accreditation, the American Bar Association, hasn’t officially weighed in on using anything other than the LSAT in admissions. What they’re waiting for, I just don’t know. But ABA accreditation Standard 503 currently mandates that law schools require admissions testing and that the test used be “valid and reliable.” Whether the GRE meets that standard, the ABA hasn’t officially said. But now that so many law schools have moved on the GRE, it might be impossible to put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).
Welcome listeners to this COVID-19 Special Report podcast presented by our friends at Wolters Kluwer and hosted by Evolve the Law Contributing Editor, Ian Connett (@QuantumJurist).
This report features David Bartolone, Vice President & General Manager of the International Group at Wolters Kluwer, who has more than 25 years’ experience with information and software solutions at a number of Fortune 500 companies. Welcome to the podcast, David!
Join us as David and Ian explore how the international law community is coping with the massive impact of COVID-19, how the crisis has sparked liberal acceptance of technology, and more on this week’s COVID-19 Special Coverage Podcast.
Bipartisanship is hard to come by during an election year, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. It’s time for the Supreme Court to GET WITH THE TIMES, GRANDPA! and start broadcasting arguments live.
Senate Judiciary Chairs Chuck Grassley and Patrick Leahy, whose aggregate age is 166, sent Chief Justice John Roberts a letter this morning apprising him of some exciting new developments in the field of digital technology.
We write to urge the Supreme Court to make permanent its recent efforts to increase transparency during the COVID-19 pandemic by providing live audio streams of all oral arguments commencing with its October 2020 term. Moreover, we urge the Court to build upon these measures by providing live video access to arguments as well—a commonsense reform that has enjoyed longstanding bipartisan support in Congress. Such access to the courtroom will empower Americans to become more informed participants in our system of government.
Whoa there, you wild-eyed radicals! Slow your roll. Not just audio, but you want video, too? That’s just crazytalk.
The senators note that the democracy did not fall apart when the court live-streamed audio of oral arguments during the recent coronavirus pandemic. And having managed to simultaneously coordinate arguments from the nine justices’ homes, plus those of the petitioners, the Court is no position to argue that the technical difficulties are somehow insurmountable.
By providing live audio access, the Court clearly demonstrated its technical capability to provide prompt disclosure and transparency to the public. And from all indications, the business before the Court was conducted in as dignified and professional a manner as is witnessed inside the courtroom under more normal circumstances.
Well, almost. Anyway, Justice Sotomayor won’t have to worry about unmuting herself if we ever get back to in-person arguments.
“We urge you, Mr. Chief Justice, to consider our request and bear in mind all those who would benefit most – including our democracy itself – from these simple yet meaningful measures of transparency,” the senators concluded.
Look for Chief Justice Roberts to agree to having cameras in his courtroom … NEVER. Does never work for you?
Judiciary Letter to Chief Justice Roberts, May 29, 2020
Elizabeth Dye (@5DollarFeminist) lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.
It seemed it was relatively quiet on the Biglaw COVID-19 austerity measures front for the last week or so. But it turns out at least one firm was busy making announcements about their cuts.
The latest firm to enact cost-cutting measures in the wake of COVID-19 is Stroock, Stroock, and Lavan. The firm, which made $258,000,000 gross revenue in 2019 making it 122nd on the Am Law 200, announced last week that they were slashing salaries.
So, what’s exactly going on at Stroock? Effective June 1, monthly draws for equity partners will be reduced by 20 percent and monthly draws for contract partners will be reduced by 15 percent. All non-partner lawyers will see a salary cut of 15 percent, and staff making $75,000+ will also see a 15 percent cut.
But there is good news for busy associates — they’ll have the opportunity to make back that cut with their billable hours:
However, those attorneys annualizing at 1,800 or more client billable hours on any of June 30, September 30 or December 31 will have any prior compensation reductions repaid within thirty days after the applicable quarter-end date.
One note a tipster had about the firm’s austerity plans (which also applies to partners at other firms deferring or cutting partner draws):
Will be interesting to see what PPP is like at all of these firms come year end. Cutting partner draws is not the same thing as cutting partner pay. If PPP doesn’t drop at least 15%-20% when all is said and done, then it will become clear that these salary cuts are just a cash grab to cushion the blow for highly paid partners at the expense of associates and staff.
We reached out to the firm for comment, but have yet to hear back.
The full version of the internal email is available on the next page.
If your firm or organization is slashing salaries, closing its doors, or reducing the ranks of its lawyers or staff, whether through open layoffs, stealth layoffs, or voluntary buyouts, please don’t hesitate to let us know. Our vast network of tipsters is part of what makes Above the Law thrive. You can email us or text us (646-820-8477).
If you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Layoff Alerts, please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the layoff alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each layoff, salary cut, or furlough announcement that we publish.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).
From: Alan Klinger and Jeff Keitelman
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 4:19 PM
To: All Personnel
Subject: COVID-19 Announcement
Stroock is a special place. We have a strong culture made up of intelligent and caring people who are committed to our collective success. Remaining strong in times of human and economic crisis is critical to our primary job as stewards of the firm – one that takes into account the needs and interests of our attorneys, staff and clients. At the outset of the pandemic, we took immediate steps to keep people safe, reduce expenses and rationalize operations, and continue to deliver outstanding legal service. However, we are not immune from the effects of the continued economic disruption to our clients and the broader economy.
As a result, we have made the difficult decision to further reduce expenses in order to ensure that we are better able to navigate an uncertain future. Being proactive is prudent, but not easy. Our decision was made with the best interest of the collective in mind and on the basis that each part of the firm would share in the temporary sacrifices that will allow us to better manage the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 crisis.
Effective June 1, 2020, the following changes will be put in place for the balance of the year. We will assess developments at year-end to see if any steps taken should be re-evaluated.
Discretionary year-end bonuses will continue to be awarded based on current eligibility criteria. Performance reviews will continue in the ordinary course.
We recognize that people have been affected by the pandemic in different ways, and some may want to explore alternative work arrangements. Accordingly, we are willing to discuss voluntary buyouts or reductions in workload for staff, and reductions in workload for lawyers, dependent of course on the needs of our practice groups and the firm generally.
Please know that we will make it through this crisis and that Stroock will emerge poised to continue its growth trajectory and ready to handle new challenges, just as it has for the last 144 years. Know also that we are available to discuss any of your concerns and questions. We appreciate your continued understanding as we navigate these unprecedented times.
— The Executive Committee
Olga V. Mack is the CEO of Parley Pro, a next-generation contract management company that has pioneered online negotiation technology. Olga embraces legal innovation and had dedicated her career to improving and shaping the future of law. She is convinced that the legal profession will emerge even stronger, more resilient, and more inclusive than before by embracing technology. Olga is also an award-winning general counsel, operations professional, startup advisor, public speaker, adjunct professor, and entrepreneur. She founded the Women Serve on Boards movement that advocates for women to participate on corporate boards of Fortune 500 companies. She authored Get on Board: Earning Your Ticket to a Corporate Board Seat and Fundamentals of Smart Contract Security. You can follow Olga on Twitter @olgavmack.
(Image via Getty)
If you thought Florida was crazy for forging ahead with an in-person bar exam over the summer, Mississippi is here to up the stakes.
Mississippi — the bar exam that forces you to go back to law school if you fail 3 times — is also going forward with an in-person exam this summer because if you’re the sort of state where people take it as a point of pride to wrestle gators for looking at you funny, you’re not going to let a crowded convention center scare you. But Mississippi has another wrinkle for new graduates taking the test — they’re going to need everyone to sign away their rights! Yes, the bar exam has actually put together a liability waiver that reads like the scary language under a pharmaceutical ad: “Attempting to become a lawyer could result in serious illness, disability and… in some cases… death.” We already knew all that of course, but Mississippi is talking about before you’re the mid-level running a trial.
Please tell me this is just the set up for an issue spotter. For a bar exam that routinely fails upwards of 65 percent of test-takers, adding life or death stakes to the equation seems a bit much, but here we are.
Good luck Mississippi folks!
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
The past two months have been surreal and, frankly, hard. Time is a blur. Conversations have migrated from solidarity, support, and concern for safety to thorny and emotionally charged discussions about reopening protocols, when masks should be required, and how to effectuate widescale temperature checks. Children everywhere have morphed into small tornadoes of energy with few outlets, either physical or emotional, to keep them (or us) grounded. And all of this seems likely to continue even with the soft openings we’re starting to see around the country. I think most of us just try not to think about it too much.
So yeah, things are heavy. But life’s not all bad, and I’d like to take some time this week to dwell on the positives that have come out of all of this stress and heartache. None of it comes close to outweighing the losses we’ve experienced, but it’s when we’re at our lowest that we owe it to ourselves to work hard to find the good.
Family First
It starts with the people we’re sharing this pandemic with. Most attorneys work long hours. We spend time away from our families more often than we’d like, sometimes as a matter of course. The past year has been particularly taxing for me from a work perspective. I often told my wife and kids how much I missed them and wished I could spend more time at home.
I wish it hadn’t taken a pandemic, but I’ve gotten to spend more time with my family in the past two months than in years, and I’ve gotten to experience life with them in ways I never would have otherwise. Like most school-aged children, my kids finished up their year taking classes online and via Zoom. I’ve seen my kids do homework and sat and worked with them on any number of assignments, but I’ve never had the opportunity to see them sit and learn from their teacher. I’ve had the chance to watch my kids process the world around them and observe how they absorb information, and it’s been special to see. I wouldn’t have gotten that chance but for COVID-19.
I’ve also been forcibly reminded lately of the benefits of intentionality and solitude. Attorneys usually have to keep lots of plates spinning, and that often means our days are spent bouncing from one task or conversation to another. People used to pop into my office or grab me in the halls constantly to get my take on a subject, or ask me to put out a fire, or just say hello. I love and miss the spontaneity and closeness that facilitates, but working at home from my office has provided me opportunities for focus and deep thought that I didn’t realize I was missing.
Talking Less, Hearing More
I’m not sure when, but at some point I think I forgot what quiet sounded like. Coronavirus has forced me to be more intentional about conversing with my team and to spend more time in solitude focusing deeply on projects in a way I haven’t been able to in a long, long time. It’s not necessarily better, but it’s a good kind of different. It’s helping me strike a balance, fill a need I didn’t realize was there. Work calls still come in, the kids still need to be pulled off each other, my wife still needs help with the 19,000 jobs she performs every hour, but for a few periods every day, I get to just sit in my own brain and work. It’s kind of glorious.
Like the rest of the working world, I’ve developed a complicated relationship with Zoom meetings. Videoconferencing has been critical during this time, and I give big kudos to Zoom for creating the gold standard for the technology. But it’s still videoconferencing. I’ve lost track of the times my screen has frozen from maxed-out broadband. People are growing tired of muting, unmuting, toggling cameras on and off, hitting the “raise hand” button, and going into break-out rooms just to converse. We’ve cycled through most of the comical backgrounds a time or two. The novelty has long worn off for most, and the cultural backlash has begun.
But I’m here to talk positives, and so I’d like to sing one specific praise of the Zoom meeting: face-to-face interaction. My firm is spread across six offices in multiple states, and I’ve probably spent years of my life in large conference rooms video-chatting with other large conference rooms elsewhere. No one can really see or hear one another that well, and so apart from the people sitting immediately around you, it’s not an experience that really brings people together. With Zoom from home, however, everyone’s face is right there. We’re all splotchy, underlit, and at unflattering angles, but we’re looking in one another’s eyes, seeing emotions and reactions flitting across each other’s faces. The interactions I’m having with teammates in other offices are the best, most human ones I’ve had over a videoconference in my career. I feel closer to those offices now than I did before.
What A Wonderful World
I’m also astonished daily by the creativity and resourcefulness this crisis has brought out in my colleagues and teammates. Amid all the chaos and uncertainty, I’ve seen innovation in how my firm communicates, how it markets itself, and how it gets work done. I’ve been approached with business development ideas that not only work around the challenges of coronavirus, but that turn those challenges into selling points and advantages. Our industry is about taking care of others’ needs, providing them advice, guidance, and help during challenging times, and the people I work with have taken that up as a call to arms.
At the end of a recent all-hands Zoom meeting, a partner’s 8-year-old son closed the meeting out by playing “What a Wonderful World” on his ukulele. I scanned the faces of the people in attendance, and saw people being moved. I saw tears, and smiles, at this performance that would never have happened were we not all trapped in our homes, fighting this pandemic.
The past two months have seen tremendous pain, heartache, and loss, but they have not been without hope. We will continue to get through this time in our lives, and we’ll do it because we have one another. Go find your silver linings. We need them now more than ever.
James Goodnow is an attorney, commentator, and Above the Law columnist. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School and is the managing partner of NLJ 250 firm Fennemore Craig. He is the co-author of Motivating Millennials, which hit number one on Amazon in the business management new release category. As a practitioner, he and his colleagues created a tech-based plaintiffs’ practice and business model. You can connect with James on Twitter (@JamesGoodnow) or by emailing him at James@JamesGoodnow.com.
Notifications