|
|
|
|
|
|
       |
|
 |  |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
Results By State Firms R-W    Gardner, Carton & Douglas Chicago Midlevel composite score: 3.65 Summer composite score: 4.74 Morale appears to be high among midlevels at Gardner, Carton & Douglas, which ranked thirteenth in the nation and third among Chicago-based offices. A newly formed associates committee and a strong mentoring program may be making the difference: All of our respondents from the firm said that they had mentors. Finishing above average in most categories, the firm was particularly strong in atmosphere, treatment of associates by partners, interest level of work, and whether associates expected to be there in two years. Gardner, Carton also got above-average marks for its pro bono commitment. "GCD is a great place to work," wrote one of the 16 respondents, apparently expressing the thoughts of many. "Most people are not only friendly, but they are your friends." There was one cloud in this silver lining. Some midlevels expressed concerns about a rising billable hour requirement, and this was one area where the firm's score was below the national average. Among summer associates, the firm ranked in the top ten nationally in every category except treatment from partners, offer acceptance, and overall atmosphere. And even in those categories it was not so shabby. One clerk praised the interesting work and the fact that "people have been willing to take the time to teach me." Another wrote: "The feedback was direct and constructive. The reviews were helpful without being overly critical." The only frequent criticism was that the firm needed to publicize itself better. (Responses: 16M, 15S) 
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher Good pay but hard work and long hours: That was the refrain heard from many of the midlevels at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's Los Angeles headquarters. Overall, associates at the firm's offices across the country rated it well above national averages for management openness and office technology, but below average in most of the other major categories except for atmosphere, where it received average marks. Training and guidance were said to be sorely lacking in many of the offices. Several associates in California offices accused the firm of trying to be like a "New York law firm," a disappointment since many had deliberately chosen to work on the West Coast. Half the respondents said the stress of work was affecting their health, and burnout among midlevels also appeared to be high: "The fading country-club veneer cannot disguise the factory-like reality of working here," wrote one. The firm received below-average scores on whether associates plan to be there for more than two years. The summer program got mixed reviews, and received below-average scores in several areas. There were gripes about a lack of feedback and too much stress. The work was interesting to some, and many midlevels reported that they liked the "free market" system of assigning it, but others said they could not get work in the areas they wanted. They found the firm prestigious, but a bit on the conservative side. There were also complaints and worries about long hours, as well as the firm's enormous size. Some found the compulsory socializing too much. Summer associates in the New York office praised the atmosphere, but thought the office "culturally homogenous," as one wrote. Some summer associates were concerned about the "dim prospects for partnership," and some women in the summer class were disconcerted by the lack of female partners. (Responses: 61M, 125S)
Godfrey & Kahn The work could have been more interesting, and the training better, but in all other respects, summer associates at Godfrey & Kahn rated their experience above average. "The firm bends over backwards to make sure that interns have an enjoyable summer with an appropriate balance of work and social events," wrote one. Also praised was the assigning system, which tried to match people with their interests. Complaints focused on Milwaukee itself, the firm's formal dress code, and-in the words of one respondent-"the weight one gains from all the free lunches." (Responses: 14S)
Goodwin, Procter & Hoar Ranked sixth among Boston-based firms and twenty-seventh nationwide among midlevels, Goodwin, Procter & Hoar earned very high marks for interest level of work (in which it ranked fourth nationally) and atmosphere (in which it was fourteenth nationally). "The partners seem to take an active interest in making sure the associates are satisfied," wrote one respondent. Two also said that the firm feels like a genuine meritocracy where hard work and intelligence are rewarded. On-site day care and a nonpartner track were both described as useful, and respondents also applauded the firm's casual dress code. Still, respondents gave the firm subpar scores for management openness about finances and strategies, and a handful of respondents said they were actively looking for another job. Summer associates raved about the training (Goodwin, Procter was in second place nationally in this area) and praised the mentoring. "The mentor[ing] is outstanding," wrote one respondent. "Great work, variety of assignments," wrote another. (Responses: 32M, 40S)
Goulston & Storrs Goulston & Storrs ranked second nationwide among midlevels and scored especially well for treatment by partners and atmosphere. Respondents said they felt valued, listened to, challenged, and respected. "As a lateral from another firm, I can say that this is an unusual place," wrote one of the ten respondents. "The partners are cooperative, care about each other, and want all associates to succeed and be happy. Money is important, but it doesn't come first. This is a great place to work!" The firm's lowest scores-albeit scores that were above national averages-were for management openness about firm finances and strategies and how well associates can discern their partnership chances. A few said they could use more training. Summer associates needed little convincing; their scores put the firm into sixth place nationally. They liked the work, the atmosphere, the people, and the training. They also appreciated the humane ethos of the place, and what one described as the "counterculture culture." (Responses: 10M, 18S)
Graham & James Talk of mergers has left some midlevels at Graham & James worried about the future, and some respondents complained that the firm lacked vision and stability. But they gave management above-average marks for openness about firm finances and strategies and associates' knowledge of their partnership prospects. The firm scored at or below average in most other survey categories. Training and atmosphere were particularly weak. Only a third of the 12 responding midlevels said they would recommend working at the firm to a friend. Still, life seems to have improved for associates at the firm since last year, and the composite score came up a few notches. For one thing, all respondents said they were happy with their compensation this year. In their written comments, midlevels praised the atmosphere as mostly casual and collegial. Summer associates also praised the atmosphere, with one respondent calling it "open, encouraging, and tolerant." The summer clerks also shared the midlevels' uneasiness about the firm's future, and the firm ranked near the bottom nationally on our question measuring whether summer clerks would accept a full-time associateship at the firm. (Responses: 12M, 17S)
Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich Finishing soundly in the top quarter of firms surveyed, Gray Cary offers associates interesting work and an enjoyable environment, responding midlevels said. "I work with really awesome, kind, funny, and laid-back people," one of the more voluble respondents wrote. "I'd never stick around if they weren't so great." What drew fire was a purported increase in the billable hours requirement. "Billable hours are the sole focus of evaluation, reward, and compensation," wrote one of the 17 respondents. Many also complained about the workload but acknowledged that it might be the nature of the business. (The 58.2-hour average workweek was only slightly above the national average.) And almost 30 percent of respondents said that they were not doing the sort of work they'd hoped for. Most summer associates said they enjoyed their stint at the firm and praised the interaction between the lawyers, who, they said, maintained an open-door policy that allowed them to feel comfortable asking questions. They also indicated that they liked the firm's aggressive marketing and its reputation in and ties to San Diego civic life, although some said they were worried about the firm's rapid growth. One respondent from the firm's Palo Alto office appreciated the "young, spirited atmosphere. . . . Partners and associates seem genuinely interested in the summer associates as individuals." (Responses: 17M, 32S)
Greenberg Traurig Midlevels at Greenberg Traurig were a bit happier than they were last year, when the firm received a well-below-average composite score, but they continue to bemoan the quality of their working lives. The workweek, at 59.5 hours, is longer than the national average, and the emphasis on billable hours for advancement, described as already extreme, is said to be increasing. In addition, several respondents said that the firm's thin staffing was burning them out and leading to high turnover. Ten percent of respondents said they were actively looking for new jobs, and more than a third were dissatisfied with their compensation. "The firm seems relatively uninterested in increasing associates' job satisfaction," wrote one. A bright spot: The firm scored above average in the category of office technology. Summer associates generally liked the place. They gave the firm scores that were well above average for training and offer-acceptance. They described the firm as well run, and one complained that it had been unfairly saddled with a reputation as a sweatshop. Another raved: "I could not have asked for a better summer experience." (Responses: 21M, 20S)
Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian In its debut in The American Lawyer's midlevel survey this year, Gunderson Dettmar finished in a respectable thirty-fourth place nationally, and turned in top-ten performances for treatment by partners, interesting work, atmosphere, and knowledge of partnership chances. Nearly all five respondents said they were satisfied with the compensation, none said they were particularly anxious about their futures, and nearly all said they were doing the sort of work they'd hoped to do as law students. So why did so few plan to be around in two years? The firm ranked in the bottom ten nationally in that category. Almost all midlevel respondents complained about the hours-at 61 per week, Gunderson Dettmar was well above the national average of 57.1 hours-and the majority of respondents said that the hours were disrupting their family and social lives. As for the summer associates, first the complaints: Everyone's busy, the firm is sometimes disorganized, it is "hard to decide between summer associate events and firm softball games," and "the name is too darn long." Pretty weak stuff: As in years past, summer associates at Gunderson said they felt trusted, trained, and entertained. The clients were top-tier Silicon Valley start-ups, they said, the environment was open, casual, and friendly, and the people were fun-loving and interesting. Wrote one respondent: "I'm amazed at how fun it can be to practice law." A new building did not hurt, although clerks complained that unlike the firm's previous digs, it lacked a foosball table and sand volleyball court. (Responses: 5M/13S)
Hale and Dorr Midlevels at Hale and Dorr gave the firm points for effort. "I think they're really trying to make this a nice place to work," wrote one. "Any dissatisfaction I've experienced is symptomatic of being a lawyer, perhaps of being a lawyer in a big firm." Many of the 16 respondents appreciated the caliber of work and reputation of the firm, and subsidized day care, a gym, and dinners were among the perks. Ninety-four percent of the respondents said they are satisfied with their compensation. Apart from the oft-heard complaints about hours and stress, midlevels also expressed some uncertainty about their future, and several lamented the lack of career development and mentoring at the firm. Summer associates said that the training was superb and extensive, but in other areas, they gave the firm below-average marks. Some worried that the full-time associates were overworked and underpaid. One felt the lack of opportunity to really get to know anyone. "In a sense, people are locked in their office," this summer associate wrote. There were fans, however, who praised the balance between work, training, and summer events. (Responses: 16M, 26S)
Haynes and Boone Haynes and Boone's midlevels gave the firm above-average marks in every category except its attitude toward billable hours; they ranked the firm fourteenth nationally and second in Dallas. Associates appreciated the good possibility of making partner, the openness of management, the interest level of the work, and the firm's emphasis on teamwork. "It is definitely a great firm in terms of professionalism with a balance of fun," wrote one respondent. A comparatively high percentage, 92 percent, said they were doing the work they hoped to do in law school. The one cloud in the sunny outlook was the concern among some midlevels that the firm culture was changing as more stress is placed on billables hours and the fact that the firm has not implemented a casual-dress policy. Summer associates were not entirely enamored of the firm. Some thought there was a dearth of social activities, and others complained about the level of work delegated to them ("inane, mindless, rinky-dink projects," wrote one respondent). A lack of feedback was also a concern. Wrote one respondent: "Rather than feeling like I'm being evaluated, I feel like I'm being watched or observed like a lab rat sometimes." (Responses: 24M, 23S)
Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe Midlevel associates awarded Heller Ehrman high marks for atmosphere, treatment by partners, and management openness. "By large-firm standards, Heller is very laid-back and progressive," one of the 16 respondents wrote. "It's a very pleasant place to practice law." There were great perks, too: Respondents said they appreciated their four weeks of vacation plus accrued time and the firm policy of giving out laptops. This firm adopted a formal mentoring program in the last year, and that may have helped produce its above-average score for training and guidance. The firm also received stellar marks for pro bono, landing in the ninth spot nationwide. Summer associates, meanwhile, said they felt the firm had a relaxed atmosphere, but they nonetheless complained of feeling overworked, of unclear expectations, and too little feedback and interaction with partners. (Responses: 16M, 24S)
Hogan & Hartson While midlevels were enthused about the interest level of their work at Hogan & Hartson, they indicated that management was somewhat uncommunicative. The firm finished in the lowest quarter of those surveyed for management openness about finances and strategies and the ease with which partnership chances could be discerned. The firm received an above-average score for its attitude toward pro bono work, placing thirtieth nationally on that question. But one respondent complained that the firm limits billable-hour credit for pro bono work to 100 hours a year. "It smacks of hypocrisy," this respondent wrote. There were also some complaints about compensation, which respondents said was low by the standards of the Washington, D.C., market. Thirty percent were dissatisfied with it. However, every respondent said they'd recommend the firm to a friend. Summer associates were fairly happy campers, although some said that the salaries for summer associates were too low. Nonetheless, they praised the training, work, people, and atmosphere. A big complaint: lack of windows in summer associates' offices. Wrote one: "I'd prefer sunlight to a raise." (Responses: 30M, 34S)
Holland & Hart Midlevels gave Holland & Hart below-average marks for atmosphere, and they weren't talking about Denver's thin and sometimes smoggy air. The nine responding midlevels voiced numerous complaints about compensation and treatment. "People are being mistreated, and as far as the associate ranks are concerned, this firm is in trouble," one responded alleged. Another contended that the firm is "hemorrhaging" associates. But the firm received a very high score for its support of pro bono work-it was tied for fifth in the nation in that category-and did well in technology, training, and ability to discern partnership chances. Summer associates had a different view. They gave the firm perfect scores for atmosphere, treatment from full-time associates, and overall experience. One respondent reported feeling included in sensitive firm discussions and reported that the partners and associates were "forthright about the relative strengths and weaknesses of the firm and the Denver market." (Responses: 9M, 7S)
Holme Roberts & Owen "Holme Roberts & Owen has a common sense attitude toward hours and workload," wrote one happy midlevel. Hours at the Colorado firm are relatively reasonable at an average of 50.8 per week. Midlevels gave the firm significantly above average scores in the categories of treatment from partners, management openness about firm finances and strategies, interest level of work, training and guidance, and associates' likelihood of sticking around for two more years. The firm's scores for atmosphere and training and guidance were above average. All five midlevel respondents said they were satisfied with their pay, found the work to resemble their law school ideal, and would recommend the firm to a friend. All told, Holme Roberts scored well enough among midlevels to earn a ranking of nineteenth place nationwide. (Responses: 5M)
Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn What midlevels at Honigman Miller liked was the significant-one said "astronomical"-amount of responsibility they are given. What they didn't like was the atmosphere, a category in which the firm scored well below average." The atmosphere tends to be unfriendly at times, and partners almost seem to enjoy being hard on associates," wrote one of the ten respondents. Still, above-average marks in most of the other areas were enough to boost the Detroit firm to twenty-second place nationally, easily first of three in Detroit. Midlevels appreciated the firm's prestige and were happy with their compensation, by and large. They also appreciated knowing about their partnership prospects, and the firm ranked first on that question. Some mentioned recent efforts to increase training and offer flexible work schedules as helpful. The six summer associates enjoyed their experience just fine and were eager for offers of full-time work. The firm had one of the shortest summer-associate workweeks, an average of only 38 hours. (Responses: 10M, 6S)
Hopkins & Sutter Summer associates were impressed with Hopkins & Sutter's summer program and recruiting department, although a few reported feeling a little anonymous and ignored by partners and associates. Still, most said they were impressed with the firm's balance between prestigious work and clients, and its emphasis on allowing its lawyers to have a well-rounded life outside the office. The biggest criticism? The tacky red carpet in the office. (Responses: 8S)
Howrey & Simon "I could not be at a better firm in terms of quality of cases," wrote one Howrey & Simon midlevel litigator. The technology at the firm was also rated far above average. Still, several of the eight respondents said they would probably be working elsewhere in two years and close to half would steer a job-hunting friend away from the firm. Some faulted the firm's atmosphere and emphasis on billables. Summer associates praised the training and feedback, as well as the practice of rotating clerks through different practice groups. They voiced some quibbles with the atmosphere, and rated it in the bottom ten nationwide. A few described the firm as cliquish. (Responses: 8M, 12S)
Hughes Hubbard & Reed Hughes Hubbard won raves from summer associates for its atmosphere and people. "I feel like I've been given real work," one wrote. "The firm has shown confidence in me (i.e., giving me client contact)." Added another: "The firm is extremely progressive, for a large, Wall Street practice. . . . The corporate negotiation workshop was a great learning experience and a lot of fun." The big drawback: the office technology, an area that several respondents singled out for criticism. The firm also had a relatively weak score of 4.1 for interest level of work, although no respondent complained about it in their written comments. (Responses: 22S)
Hunton & Williams Hunton & Williams's midlevels scored their firm in the bottom third nationally overall. It also landed in the bottom third for interest level of work, atmosphere, and emphasis on billables. Midlevels also complained that they were excluded from decision making and felt fairly anonymous. Some of the 37 respondents also said the firm had the feel of an "old-boy" network. Midlevels gave it below-average scores in every category except receptiveness to pro bono work, where Hunton & Williams ranked an admirable third in the nation. In their written comments, several associates expressed appreciation for the caliber of work they were doing, although some said they felt deprived of direct client contact. Another frequent complaint was that management plays favorites and rewards those who are good at schmoozing, rather than those who produce quality work. One lamented "the hidden motives of everyone." There were numerous complaints about the hours, which at an average of 58 per week were only slightly above the national average. A quarter of the respondents said they were actively seeking a new job, and 27 percent said they would discourage a newly graduated law student friend from applying at the firm. The firm was close to last in the nation on the question of whether summer associates would accept an offer of full-time work from the firm. Still, many praised the summer program, although the system of being assigned to one partner for the summer was not to everyone's liking. (Responses: 37M, 33S)
Irell & Manella Midlevels at Irell & Manella said the firm has a good attitude, although life there isn't a laugh a minute. "People believe in working hard to benefit clients within reasonable working conditions," wrote one of the nine respondents. In general, associates gave it high marks for having an open style of management, and most said they have a pretty good idea of their partnership chances. One respondent reported that the firm's minimum billable hour requirement was recently reduced to 1,900 hours from 2,000 hours in response to associate complaints. But here's the rub: Nearly half of respondents said they were dissatisfied with their compensation, and one complained the firm was cheap. The result was that many respondents said they did not expect to stick around beyond the next two years. Summer associates had a good time, and their high ratings placed the firm in forty-seventh place nationally among summer associates. The firm ranked seventh in the nation for treatment by associates and tenth for interest level of work. One respondent praised the firm for a "wide variety of very interesting work in an atmosphere in which you can be yourself." (Responses: 9M, 20S)
Jenkens & Gilchrist Summer associates at Jenkens & Gilchrist said they liked the variety of options and specialties at the firm, but sometimes felt that it was too big and departmentalized. Many said they found it hard to move among practice areas and daunting to have to choose one right at the start. Although the firm had below-average scores in offer-acceptance and atmosphere, many respondents praised the firm's lawyers in their written comments. Still, a few called the firm too conservative politically. (Responses: 41S)
Jenner & Block Midlevels at Jenner & Block indicated that they felt appreciated, though at times overworked. They gave the firm above-average marks for treatment by partners, interest level of the work, training and guidance, and atmosphere. "The people are very nice and treat you like a person and a friend, not like a slave," wrote one. A large majority intended to stay beyond two more years. The firm's composite score among midlevels was further buoyed by a strong score for emphasizing pro bono work: The firm finished fifth in the nation in that category. Two respondents, though, said that the firm placed too much of an emphasis on billables and focused too much on the bottom line. Summer associates had an average workweek of 43.3 hours, a bit lower than the national average of 44.5 hours, and said, for the most part, that they were impressed with the firm. They praised the firm's pro bono commitment and characterized the work available at the firm as cutting-edge and the lawyers as nice. The litigation group was singled out for particular kudos. (Responses: 13M, 36S)
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue Management received plenty of criticism at Jones, Day, but it was tough to figure out exactly why. One respondent asserted that "there is no management at this firm, [and] the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing," but others went to the opposite extreme, terming the management "a dictatorship." The firm's scores were below average in most categories, and especially low in the areas of atmosphere and management openness about finances and strategies. Many of the 50 respondents also said they were in the dark about their partnership chances. Some charged that the firm did not take their job satisfaction seriously. Quipped one: "About twice a year, the firm's 'morale committee' opens a tab at a nearby bar and lets us drink until we're satisfied with our jobs." The bright side? Respondents were generally appreciative of the responsibility they were given, the training and guidance they were given, the quality of the work, and their fellow associates. The various components of the summer program were rated at or below national averages. Like midlevels, summer associates appreciated the caliber and interest level of the firm's work, and many wrote that its lawyers were friendly and easygoing. So what was the problem? One respondent contended that the firm's people and politics were too middle-of-the-road; others argued for a more casual dress code; and some in the New York and Chicago offices wanted a ban on smoking. (Responses: 50M, 96S)
Jones Walker Waechter Poitevent Carrère
& Denègre Jones Walker got above-national-average marks from associates in nearly every survey category, and it finished in sixty-first place nationally. "The attorneys . . . are very interested in mentoring and advising the summer clerks," wrote one respondent. "Both partners and associates take an active interest in the clerk program and in each clerk individually. The environment is incredibly warm and welcoming-surprising and impressive for such a large firm." So why the low score on the offer-acceptance question? Respondents gave few clues. Asked what he liked least about the firm, one wrote, "Not being from South Louisiana, I can only participate in about half of the conversations." (Responses: 29S)
Katten Muchin & Zavis In their written comments, midlevels said they appreciated the open and informal atmosphere at Katten Muchin & Zavis, as well as the treatment they received at the hands of the firm's partners. "It's a very free-to-be-me environment," wrote one. Another added: "Individual styles are encouraged and all types can succeed." Midlevels said they had a good knowledge of their partnership chances and gave the firm above-average marks in that area. But the firm's composite score on the midlevel survey tumbled this year to below the national average after finishing comfortably above average last year. According to the 39 respondents, flies in the ointment included uninteresting work, a paucity of training, some management secrecy, and few special benefits, although associates said there was talk of implementing sabbaticals. Some respondents said that associate retention was a problem. An above-average percentage of associates indicated that they were planning to leave in the next two years; 15 percent of respondents said they were already looking elsewhere. A quarter of the respondents reported being unhappy with their compensation. Among summer associates, Katten finished in about the middle of the pack; the strong suit was the atmosphere. The firm's youthfulness, lack of pretension, and sense of humor were appreciated. There was praise for the training and mentoring, although some respondents said they could have used more feedback. In general, the partners were seen as remote. (Responses: 39M, 33S)
Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler "Nice atmosphere, poor communication within the firm," is the capsule review that the seven responding midlevels gave to Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler. Although the overall score was down somewhat from last year, morale seemed to have improved marginally since then. The firm scored well below the national average on our question measuring whether midlevels expect to remain at the firm for two more years, but no respondents said they were actively seeking work elsewhere. The lack of communication contributed to below-national-average scores for management openness on firm finances and strategies and clarity of partnership chances. In general, midlevels said they felt left in the dark. "Sometimes we find out things from reading the [legal newspapers] and not from firm sources," wrote one. Summer associates ranked the firm in the bottom five nationally in the category of interest level of work. They also said the program was a little disorganized and had an uneven work flow. Some termed it cheap in its attitude toward lunches and salaries. On the plus side, respondents said they liked the people and the environment. Wrote one: "If you have to work long hours, you might as well do it where other associates are approachable, willing to help you, down to earth, have personalities, and are nice." (Responses: 7M, 23S)
Kelley Drye & Warren The misery quotient runs high among the seven associate respondents at Kelley Drye & Warren, which tied for second from the bottom nationally. Most said they did not have great prospects for a future at the firm. They wrote of feeling devoid of guidance, mentoring, and feedback. The low morale showed up in most of the numbers. The firm was given lower-than-national-average marks in every category. Marks for atmosphere, management openness, and discerning partnership chances were particularly dismal. Half of the midlevels respondents said they would not recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. Apart from some appreciation for the reputation of the firm, about the only bright spot was universal satisfaction with compensation. At least they didn't take out their frustrations on the summer associates, who reported that their treatment by the firm's full-time associates, as well as the partners, was stellar. In fact, they had a pretty good time all around, felt respected, and found the atmosphere conducive to learning. "I've gotten exactly what I was looking for out of this summer," wrote one. Not that it was all wonderful. One alluded to clashes between the "old school and the new." Another was unhappy to be on call on weekends. And one thought brightening the gray decor would lift everyone's spirits. (Responses: 7M, 16S)
Kilpatrick Stockton Many aspects of midlevel associates' lives at Kilpatrick Stockton are just about or slightly below national averages, respondents said. Management communication about finances and strategies ranked below national averages, but the firm came in above average in the area of clarity of partnership chances. They also gave the firm above-average scores on our question measuring whether they expected to still be working there in two years. Several midlevels thought the firm put too much emphasis on billable hours, although the average workweek (54.5 hours) was shorter than the national average. Two associates lamented, as one put it, "the fact that there is no such thing as a guilt-free vacation." The summer program was no day at the beach, but it exceeded some of the respondents' expectations. A handful wanted more feedback and felt they could have handled more assignments. Some thought the socializing was over-emphasized, and one or two resented the exclusion of spouses at these events. Some also said they wished they could have done some more pro bono work. But most found the firm's lawyers approachable, and friendly and the environment surprisingly relaxed. (Responses: 20M, 46S)
King & Spalding Midlevels at King & Spalding wrote glowingly about the firm's reputation, professionalism, and caliber of work. With partners like former senator Sam Nunn and former attorney general Griffin Bell, and clients like Coca-Cola and heavyweights in the tobacco industry, it's no surprise. So why did the 47 midlevel respondents give the firm slightly below-average marks overall? The answers, they said, were little communication and training, poor partnership prospects, some dissatisfaction with compensation, and a dearth of special benefits. "The partners are reaping huge rewards off of the backs of hardworking associates mired in discovery hell," wrote one. Others wrote that they felt they lacked a future at the firm. The firm also ranked slightly below average for treatment from partners, and some respondents wrote that despite admiration for the partners as lawyers, the higher-ups conveyed "arrogance" and "distrust." Although many respondents said that partnership prospects at the firm were bleak, they gave the firm an average score on our question measuring whether midlevels expected to stay there for another two years. Summer associates, on the other hand, were impressed by the firm's big names, prestige, and recruiting department, and the firm scored in the top 25 percent nationally overall in most categories. Respondents characterized the firm's lawyers as nice, interesting, and down-to-earth. But there were a few reservations, such as the one voiced by a respondent: "The summer program is fun and informative, but I don't think we have any idea what our life as a K&S associate would be like." (Responses: 47M, 47S)
Kirkland & Ellis Among Chicago offices, Kirkland ranks a lowly seventeenth place in overall midlevel job satisfaction. But in New York, it's in an impressive first place. Nationally, the multioffice firm finished fifty-fourth, still well-above average, but not as high as in previous years. Midlevels continued to rate the interest level of their work high, and said they were happy to be at such a prestigious firm. "There's nothing like the cachet of the Kirkland name," wrote one D.C.-based litigator. "People here take pride in living up to that." Associates in the Los Angeles and New York offices raved about the atmosphere. But most other marks were just above average, and the firm's score for management openness was below the national average. The real rub seems to be compensation. Almost a quarter of the 38 responding midlevels said they were dissatisfied with their paychecks, and one accused management of out-and-out greed. "Compensation issues have caused a lot of stress between associates and partners," one Chicago midlevel wrote. The dissatisfaction had some job searching. Eighteen percent of the respondents in all the offices said they are actively seeking new jobs. Summer associates were impressed with the firm, putting it in twenty-sixth place nationally. Particularly outstanding was the training, they said, which ranked seventh in the country. In addition, the firm finished in the top 20 nationally for treatment by partners and interest level of work. New York summer associates rated the firm first in the city. (Responses: 38M, 75S)
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Kirkpatrick & Lockhart is experiencing "growing pains," associates in both the Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C., offices said, and one respondent said that the result is that associates are in "limbo." Midlevels appreciated that they tended to work shorter hours than some of their counterparts at other firms, but they also said the firm was becoming too focused on billable hours and the bottom line. Midlevels gave the firm rankings that were below the national average in atmosphere, interest level of work, and treatment from partners. In the D.C. office, especially, there were complaints about the partners. While the firm received scores that were above the national average for management openness, associates also said they were somewhat unclear about their partnership prospects. Not one respondent was looking for another job, however, and most reported being happy with their compensation. Summer associates rated their experience below the national average, especially in work-level interest, and treatment by the firm's partners and full-time associates. But they did like the overall atmosphere, giving it above-average marks. (Responses: 21M, 33S)
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel Midlevels liked the atmosphere at Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, and the firm's scores reflect that they were more than happy with their treatment from the firm's partners. But they said they could use better communication from the management and a clearer idea of their partnership prospects. But the firm scored above average among midlevels in its attitude toward pro bono work, and its training and guidance. Some of the special benefits, like child care, domestic partner benefits, and a six-week sabbatical after several years of service, were also warmly appreciated. Summer associates ranked the firm below the national average overall, especially for interest level of work, training, and treatment by other associates and partners. Still, they liked the atmosphere, and most said they would accept a full-time offer from the firm. (Responses: 20M, 28S)
Latham & Watkins Midlevels from most of Latham & Watkins's offices across the country praised the firm's atmosphere, which they described as both laid-back and professional. Several also said the place was well managed. Most said they found their work sophisticated and interesting and the clients high-caliber. Cumulatively, the firm scored one of the highest marks in the country for management openness, ranking eighth nationally. Latham also received higher-than-average marks for the clarity of the partnership track. "You have a realistic chance at partnership," one respondent wrote. The most common complaint was that the firm was too focused on billable hours, a category in which it ranked in the bottom 20 nationally. Ninety-two percent of respondents reported that they were satisfied with their compensation-but 17 percent said they were looking for work elsewhere anyway. Summer associates praised the firm's cutting-edge work, big clients, atmosphere, and the people; their scores placed the firm in the top quarter nationally. "Very smart people, yet without arrogance," wrote one. Still one respondent noted, and worried about, "a dearth of third-, fourth-, and fifth-year associates." Although the firm's workweek for summer associates (43.9 hours) was shorter than the national average of 44.5 hours, some respondents said they felt overworked and worried that the hours would be even more grueling as a full-timer. Nevertheless, most respondents said they were eager to at least start their careers at Latham. (Responses: 59M, 91S)
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae Summer associates found some of the insurance work they did at LeBoeuf, Lamb a bit boring, and some said that the firm was too bureaucratic. But the firm and the summer program did have their fans. Most praised the atmosphere and the people as down-to-earth and accessible, although one respondent said that "people tend to be too nice, and it sometimes comes across as dishonest." Even so, the firm ranked in the bottom quarter in all categories. A possible culprit: The workweek-at 52.4 hours-was the nation's third-longest. (Responses: 16S)
Littler Mendelson Associates at Littler Mendelson found their work extremely interesting and the hours, which were lower than the national average, fairly reasonable. Several said they appreciated that the place was "not a sweatshop." In addition, some of the associates said that the firm was, in general, forward-thinking and open-minded. The firm scored significantly above average for interest level of work (sixteenth nationally) and associates' knowledge of their partnership chances (fourth nationally). The bad news was that many of them rated their compensation mediocre, and some said that the perks were deficient. One midlevel accused the firm of "nickel-and-diming" associates on bonuses, use of laptops, and weekend meal reimbursements. The most often-heard criticism was that the large, multioffice firm was too bureaucratic. A lack of training was also a frequent refrain; the firm scored well below the national average in the category of training and guidance. The dissatisfaction was taking its toll. Nineteen percent of respondents said they were actively seeking new jobs. Nearly one-quarter said they would not recommend the firm to a friend. Roughly half said they doubted that the firm would be loyal to them in hard economic times. Among summer associates the firm ranked in the bottom quarter of those surveyed. Like the midlevels, they voiced complaints about the lack of training and feedback. Some felt that work was thrown at them with not enough information or guidance. However, several found the work in labor and employment law interesting and liked the responsibility given them. (Responses: 31M, 16S)
Loeb & Loeb The six summer associates who responded from Loeb & Loeb raved about the place and ranked it in fourth place nationally. They felt the firm, with its large entertainment and intellectual property practice, was the place to be in Los Angeles, especially if you were outgoing and like parties. One described the work as sexy. "The firm has the best hiring policies for summer associates," wrote one. "It appeals to the sophisticated law student who knows what they want to do." (Responses: 6S)
Long Aldridge & Norman Midlevels appreciated the "generally friendly, entrepreneurial atmosphere," as one wrote, at Long Aldridge & Norman, and they gave the firm very strong scores for atmosphere. The interest level of the work also ranked high, twenty-seventh nationally. Some of the nine respondents expressed concern, however, that recent rapid expansion might hurt both the atmosphere and communication from management. Also lamented was the "very recent increased emphasis on billable hours." Perhaps in a response to feared changes, an unusually high number of respondents, 33 percent, said they were looking for a new job. But all the respondents said they were satisfied with their compensation. Summer associates noticed the firm was going through changes, and like the midlevels, worried about the effect of the rapid growth. They also wanted more feedback, and a better idea of what life as a full-time associate would be like. Some said they loved the "liberal Democrat" leanings of the firm; others thought it was too slanted politically. (Responses: 9M, 19S)
Lord, Bissell & Brook Midlevels at Lord, Bissell & Brook said they appreciated the atmosphere and the length of the workweek, which averaged 53.3 hours, shorter than the national average. "Good people, not a sweatshop," wrote one Atlanta-based respondent. The firm received marks that were about average in most categories, though training was rated well above average. A majority said they planned on staying put for at least the next two years. But some of the 14 responding midlevels complained about a high degree of management secrecy and murky chances at partnership. "Information is gleaned only from the grapevine," wrote one. Only half found the work measured up to their law school ideal. Among summer interns, the interest level of the work and the training were below national averages. The summer hires also thought the Chicago offices were a little shabby. What did summer associates like? Casual all-summer dress, the relaxed but respectful atmosphere, and the fact that the office often was close to empty by about 6 p.m. "It's not that the people don't work hard," one respondent wrote. "They just seem to know how to set boundaries." (Responses: 14M, 23S)
Lowenstein Sandler There is much that Lowenstein Sandler seems to be doing right, said its midlevel associates, with a few notable exceptions that pulled its average down. Many praised the atmosphere, people, and high quality of work at the firm. Generally, they were satisfied with their salaries. The firm scored far above the national average for relaxed attitude toward billable hours. Still, management got poor marks for openness, and the firm finished in the bottom 25 percent nationally. Low marks were also given for likelihood of staying at the firm for another two years. Some midlevels grumbled about the the quality of their training. Some of the perks were appreciated, though: weekend babysitting services, an on-site gym, catered dinners, and as one said, a "great cafeteria with a newly built outdoor patio for fresh-air dining." Summer associates praised the challenging assignments, relaxed atmosphere, and relatively relaxed lifestyle at the firm. Many felt the summer program achieved the right balance between support and independence realism, and enjoyment, although a few wanted more feedback. (Responses: 11M, 15S)
Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps Some midlevel associates at Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps said they find the firm too conservative and lacking in personality; others said the work was boring. Indeed, the five responding midlevels gave scores in the interest level of work category that were among the lowest of the firms surveyed, and put Luce, Forward in 159th place in that category. Other areas of particular weakness included management openness, the firm's attitude about pro bono work, and midlevels' plans to stick around for two years or more. Midlevels appreciated the humane workweek, which averaged 51 hours per week, but some bemoaned what they said was a rising emphasis on billables. Not one of the five respondents knew of any special perks or benefits that the firm offered other than free parking. Summer associates, on the other hand, highly recommend the experience. The firm was well above average in every category except for interest level of work. They gave the atmosphere perfect marks in that category. Asked one: "What's not to like?" Overall, the firm ranked fourteenth from the top nationally and in first place in San Diego. (Responses: 5M, 10S)
Mayer, Brown & Platt Most of the specific complaints from midlevels at Mayer, Brown & Platt focused on the demanding work and hours. The associates said that they work hard, and their cases are interesting, but that they also feel a little unappreciated and crave more feedback. They rated their training below the national average and found their partnership possibilities hard to discern. They gave the firm's technology marks that are significantly below the national average. Fourteen percent said they are actively looking for new jobs; 28 percent said they are unhappy with their compensation. But in the perk category, respondents said, Mayer, Brown & Platt is trying. An on-site gym is planned and emergency child care was implemented recently. In the eyes of the summer associates, training and guidance, mentoring, and treatment by partners and full-time associates were the firm's weak spots. They did, however, appreciate the firm's free-market job-assignment system and the variety of work available, but some complained that they felt anonymous. (Responses: 29M, 45S)
McCarter & English The summer program at McCarter & English received relatively ho-hum scores. Summer associates felt well-treated, especially by the full-time associates, and thought the program balanced social activities with work. But one thought it lacked direction and structure, and the training scores were near the bottom of the firms surveyed. One thought there was too much emphasis on litigation and not enough on corporate work. But the biggest complaint was, as one respondent put it, "location, location, location. . . . [Newark] is the ugliest city on the East Coast." (Responses: 12S)
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen McCutchen's scores for treatment by partners, atmosphere, and management openness were all above average. Several of the 18 responding midlevels credited the firm with being open-minded, diverse, and concerned about associate well-being. "If you're going to be in a big firm, this is the place to be," wrote one. Every respondent said they were satisfied with their pay. Very high scores for training and guidance and attitude toward pro bono work pulled the composite score up among midlevels; overall the firm ranked twenty-second nationally. Midlevels in McCutchen's branch offices had especially good things to say about their life at the firm, singling out great mentoring in Walnut Creek, and "bright, fun people" and "lots of free food" in Palo Alto. But among respondents from the home office in San Francisco, there was some grumbling about workload problems, and, in some cases, pleas for more training. Summer associates praised the "young," "liberal," and "tolerant" atmosphere at the firm, and the fact that people seemed to have lives outside of the office. But they found the partners a little inaccessible, and some said the work could have been more interesting. "Too many research projects that aren't oriented toward actual cases," one wrote. Some found the firm too litigation-focused for their taste, and said they would have liked more transactional, corporate, or intellectual property work. (Responses: 18M, 26S)
McDermott, Will & Emery Midlevels at McDermott, Will & Emery scored their firm below the national averages for treatment by partners, interest level of work, training and guidance, and atmosphere. More than a quarter of the 39 respondents said they'd discourage a job-seeking friend from applying at the firm. "Dissatisfaction at all levels is rampant," wrote one associate in Washington, D.C., and others said they felt expendable and "fungible." Several complained that the firm saw law as a business, rather than a profession, and lacked an overall vision (although others complimented the firm on its "profitability.") On the other hand, the firm scored at about the national average for management openness and discernability of partnership prospects. Another positive: The firm's offices in Chicago were said to be beautiful. Summer associates in the Chicago office were nearly unanimous in criticizing the firm's recruiting department. For many, it cast a pall on the whole experience. But those in the New York office had a hard time finding something they did not like, and they singled out the relaxed atmosphere of the firm for praise. (Responses: 39M, 28S)
McGuire Woods Battle & Boothe McGuire Woods Battle & Boothe scored points for having a relatively relaxed atmosphere and a diverse group of lawyers. "The black lawyers are numerous compared to other firms," wrote one, "and they are especially talented." The firm got the highest marks in the country for technology. Scores for management openness were also unusually high, and 85 percent of the respondents said they had a mentor. But some of the 13 responding midlevels said they wished management would ease up on billable hours and complained of feeling slightly overworked, even though the firm's average midlevel workweek, 56 hours, was below the national average. Summer associates rated their experience below the national average, particularly on the offer-acceptance question. Those who said they would reject an offer from the firm cited its Richmond location and dissatisfaction with pay among the reasons. One thought the summer program needed fewer cocktail parties and more informal outings. On the plus side, many said the firm's humane and civil culture was a well-kept secret. (Responses: 13M, 14S)
McKenna & Cuneo Many midlevels at McKenna & Cuneo said they feel left in the dark about the business of the firm and where it is headed. And that was far from their only complaint. The 11 responding midlevels rated the firm below average in every category except technology. In their written comments, they said the atmosphere, reputation, and other associates were the best thing about the firm, but they still gave the atmosphere below average marks. "Everything is about generating business," wrote one. "There's an eat-what-you-kill mentality." The dissatisfaction is reflected in the fact that four respondents said they are currently looking for other jobs. More than a quarter would not recommend the firm to a friend, and more than half did not think the firm would be loyal to them in hard times. Only in the area of compensation was there relative satisfaction. Ninety-one percent said they were content with their paycheck. Summer associates also gave the firm a below-average overall score, although they rated the training above average. One in the Denver office wrote: "They have given me a number of resources (mentors, ability to attend meetings, depositions etc. . . .) to discover what it would be like to work here." (Responses: 11M, 7S)
Michael Best & Friedrich Our six respondent summer associates said their treatment by the full-time associates at Michael Best & Friedrich could not have been better: The firm received perfect 5s across the board on this question. They also ranked this firm third nationally for willingness to accept an offer of full-time work. The firm finished in first place in Milwaukee and twelfth place nationally. Indeed, the summer program was praised all around, for being supportive, for giving clerks a realistic look at associate life, and for offering the right balance between work and social life. Respondents also appreciated the diversity of projects, from litigation to transactions to intellectual property. Wrote one satisfied customer: "From what I have seen about other large firms, this firm can't be topped." (Responses: 6S)
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy Milbank midlevels tended to like their work, their practice areas, and the money, but that was about all. The firm ranked well below national averages for training, management openness, and discernability of partnership chances. It also fell below the national average in atmosphere and treatment from partners. "The Milbank partners view associates as wage laborers, not colleagues," wrote one disgruntled associate. Two respondents in both the New York and Los Angeles offices said they felt mistreated by senior associates. Three respondents complained that they lacked a future at the firm and that partnership prospects were depressing. Midlevels gave it below-national-average marks on the question of whether they'd stay at the firm for another two years, and 16 percent of respondents said they were already looking for work elsewhere. One respondent who had been a summer associate at Milbank felt betrayed. "This is not the firm I spent my summer at," this respondent wrote. "The focus on economics has destroyed the collegial atmosphere." But summer associates gave Milbank marks that were above national averages and had lots of compliments for the atmosphere and the people. "You can ask them any questions and no one makes you feel stupid," wrote one. "Very esoteric crowd that is quite stimulating," wrote another. In the New York office, several wrote favorably of an outing on the managing partner's yacht. But the interns also may have gotten the sense that full-time associate life is not as grand. They gave the firm below-average marks on whether they would accept a full-time offer from the firm. (Responses: 38M, 48S)
Miles & Stockbridge Summer interns at Miles & Stockbridge praised the firm's congenial atmosphere and the high quality of the work; one respondent noted with glee that even the managing partner took time to offer training and guidance. "They really want us to like working for M & S, and they show it," wrote one respondent. But the firm had only average scores for training and guidance, and in their written comments, some clerks faulted the firm for using outdated computers and for a lack of pro bono opportunities. One criticized the social events, contending that the firm had an oppressive "beer/frat" culture. (Responses: 14S)
Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone Low marks from five responding midlevels for training, management openness, and attitude toward billable hours landed Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone fourth from the bottom among midlevels nationally. One respondent said succinctly that the place has "horrible associate morale." Two said they were looking for work elsewhere, and the same number said they are unhappy with their compensation. There were some bright spots. A few respondents expressed cautious optimism about an effort to improve the firm's training program. The firm's technology also received very high marks. Summer associates seem to have spent their time at a different firm altogether. They loved the experience and rated the firm sixth from the top nationally. One reported being "pleasantly surprised by how friendly the firm is." Several praised the variety of the assignments and found the work challenging, though the workload a bit heavy at times. (Responses: 5M, 10S)
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo They say that management is open with them, and that they are treated well, but midlevels at Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo put their chances of sticking around for two years below the national average, and almost a quarter of the respondents say they are already looking for jobs elsewhere. The problem may be that the work is less than fascinating: The firm, which finished nineteenth from the top in the national midlevel rankings, had marks that were below the national average in that area. Some of the 13 respondents worried that the "firm culture" was changing and that billable hours were more important than is officially stated. But by-and-large, midlevels told tales of contentment in the workplace, and gave management the third-highest marks in the country for being open with them, including about their partnership chances. One extolled the "lack of hierarchy," and another, the "friendly, open and respectful" atmosphere. On-site day care and creative employment policies such as paternity leave were also popular. Similar kudos came from summer associates. "The summer program is extremely low-key and not at all stress-inducing," wrote one. "The people are human and humane." But some found the work dull. (Responses: 13M, 19S)
Mitchell Silberberg
& Knupp, Good firm, but the summer program needs work, was the essence of what summer associates had to say about Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp. Many liked the work, the famous clients, and the firm's Hollywood connections. And in the area of training, the firm's scores were above the national average. Criticisms of the summer program included treatment by partners and by associates, two categories in which the firm had scores that were well below national averages. In addition, one respondent asserted that summer interns were "overwhelmed by assignments in the first few weeks." (Responses: 10S)
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius The pay is good and the hours aren't too bad at Morgan Lewis & Bockius, midlevels say, but in other areas, respondents gave it scores that were at or below national averages. Still, the firm's composite score, while below the national average, is better than last year's. Contentment with the pay was much higher than it was last year, with 84 percent of respondents saying they are satisfied with their compensation. Some respondents also said the firm was making real attempts to be more open in discussions about finances, compensation, and policies. Some complained about the unequal distribution of work, and in the firm's Philadelphia office, there were more gripes than in the New York office about the number of hours worked. In fact, New York midlevels found the hours, an average of 56 per week, downright humane. Associates in both cities generally praised the firm's relaxed and collegial atmosphere. But many of those who were reasonably happy with their jobs said they were nervous about the future. "There are only so many [partnership] slots," wrote a Philadelphia midlevel. "Chances for partnership are minimal to nonexistent," echoed one in New York. Among summer associates, Morgan, Lewis did not break the top 100 in any category, but many respondents still had good things to say about the people, the atmosphere, and the work. Respondents who spent their summer in New York had a better time of it than those in Los Angeles, and said the firm generally lived up to its humane reputation. A Philadelphia respondent raved about being given the opportunity to "second-chair a trial" and called the atmosphere relaxed and the opportunities endless. A couple of respondents in the Washington office found it a bit too quiet and formal. (Responses: 88M, 71S)
Morrison & Foerster Morrison & Foerster associates gave the firm plenty of points for diversity. "Everyone from Republican lesbians to liberal white men work here," wrote one of the 14 respondents "As long as you do your work, you don't have to fit into anyone's idea of a big-firm lawyer." A couple of respondents also praised the firm's policy of promoting pro bono work. Most liked their salaries. So, why was the firm's midlevel score just above average? According to the written comments, the reasons were long hours, too many nights and weekends worked, and too much emphasis on billables. (However, the firm's average midlevel workweek was slightly below the national average, and its score for emphasis on billables was at the national average.) The firm had below-average scores for training and guidance, and only half the respondents said they had a mentor at the firm, although the firm had high scores for treatment by partners. A larger than average number of midlevels said they'd be leaving before two years passed. Twenty-one percent said they were already job hunting. Summer associates found the firm's size and bureaucracy a little daunting, but they praised its diversity, progressive philosophy, cutting-edge work, and casual dress policy. Disclosed one respondent: "Jeans are okay and the managing partner dances disco like a fiend." (Responses: 14M, 38S)
Munger, Tolles & Olson What are the associates at Munger, Tolles & Olson, the number one firm in our midlevel survey, so darned happy about? "Intellectual atmosphere," "freedom to select areas one works in," "no hierarchy, good chance of making partner," "democratic decision-making," "emphasis on quality work, not quantity of hours," and "supportive environment" were among the reasons that the five respondents gave. Some of the standout scores were for atmosphere, interest level of work, treatment from partners, management openness. The enlightened attitude toward billable hours was highly praised. No one said they were looking for a job at another firm. Everyone said they were happy with their pay, felt minimal anxiety about the future, and trusted the firm's loyalty. Was there room for improvement? Yes. The firm's score for technology was far below average. One respondent said the firm needs more women partners. Another recommended a casual everyday dress code. (Responses: 5M)
Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough The 12 summer associates who responded said their stays at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough could not have been better. All 12 gave perfect 5s to the partners and the associates. What pulled the overall score down, to far below the national average, was the relatively low interest level of the work, lack of training and guidance, and the fact that most respondents were on the fence about whether they would accept an offer of full-time work. "I think they could give summer associates a little more responsibility and workload," wrote one intern. Another wrote that the research and writing assignments could get boring. One could have used more face-to-face feedback. Still another noted that there was a lack of full-time associates just out of law school. (Responses: 12S)
O'Melveny & Myers Fewer than half the midlevels at O'Melveny & Meyers said they had mentors at the firm, and training and guidance was a category in which the firm received marks that were well below the national average. Many of the 38 respondents said that communication within the firm is poor and caused confusion about such policies as pro bono work and partnership prospects. Other reasons for the below-average composite score? Midlevels at O'Melveny work a longer workweek than most, an average of 59.6 hours, and felt that their compensation wasn't quite making up for it. Los Angeles midlevels groused about the minimum billable hours requirements. Thirty-four percent of the respondents from all the offices were dissatisfied with their pay. But the firm's midlevels in general noted the good camaraderie in the office and said it helped brighten the long hours. Many were also happy with the work itself. Many summer associates said that because of the firm's large size, the quality of the summer program depended greatly on whom you met. Some respondents said they didn't meet a single person that they did not like, while others said the environment was a little too intense. A few felt overworked, and some respondents in the New York office complained that there was too little context to their work: That is, they were given tasks but no notion as to how the tasks fit into the overall case they were working on. (Responses: 38M, 71S)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe Many midlevels at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe reported feeling leery about the firm's direction. Although most of the respondents still admired their colleagues and appreciated the caliber and challenge of their work, some criticized a more bottom-line emphasis. "Gone is the humane culture of the firm," lamented one. A new minimum billable requirement appeared to be deeply resented. And a few of the 23 respondents accused the firm of being tight-fisted with special benefits and perks. While summer associates also praised the atmosphere at the firm, and the people, many said they were somewhat bored by the work given to them and uncertain about whether they'd accept offers of full-time work. Several respondents in both the New York and Los Angeles offices said their summer program needed revamping, to include more activities and more wining and dining. (Responses: 23M, 23S)
Palmer & Dodge Great work, great atmosphere. If only midlevels at Palmer & Dodge could figure out their partnership chances, life would be grand. Associates gave the firm extremely high scores for interest level of the work and the firm's atmosphere (nationally, it was fifth and ninth place, respectively, in those categories), although some respondents suggested that the firm rid itself of troublesome clients. Midlevels reported feeling that the firm actually cares about their well-being. The workweek, for one thing, is below the national average. "Collectively, there is an attempt to maintain a humane work environment here," wrote one. "The firm prides itself in not being a sweatshop." Ranking fourteenth nationally, and sixth in Boston, the firm has a lot of people-pleasing policies, including subsidized gym memberships, day care, and a cafeteria with good food. Summer associates appreciated the firm's caring atmosphere, commitment to improving their skills, and the real-life nature of their work experience. But some said the mellowness borders on being low-energy, and others said the assignment system was uneven, so some felt overworked. (Responses: 14M, 18S)
Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler By New York standards, midlevels at Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler have a cushy, below-the-national-average workweek, just 53.6 hours. So, what's the problem? Lack of training and guidance, and work that was rated well below the national average in the category of interest level. Also, midlevel respondents said they saw poor future prospects for themselves, and, as a result, an above-average number say they will leave in less than two years. Still, most of the 12 of the respondents said they would recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. Both the workload, and the interest level of the work, can vary widely at the firm, respondents said. "There's a possibility of getting trapped on one crappy case exclusively when there is a lot of interesting work here," wrote one. "A few people work like dogs, and they get shafted," wrote another. Summer associates said they thought the firm was a well-kept secret and ranked it sixth in the city. "The firm has a really normal healthy attitude about work," wrote one. "High-quality legal service, and decent hours." They also appreciated that the work was not exclusively banking-related, although one complained that the assignments tended to be no-brainers. Nationally, the firm finished in twentieth place. (Responses: 12M, 7S)
Patton Boggs Patton Boggs's five responding midlevels loved the place, giving it high scores that propelled it to ninth place nationally and first place among Washington, D.C., firms. The firm received first-place scores for interest level of work and commitment to pro bono work; it also received high marks in management openness and discernability of partnership chances. Retention was another strong point: A solid majority of respondents said they will expect to be at the firm in two years. All respondents said they have a mentor, are satisfied with their compensation, and would recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. The only areas in which the firm scored below the national average were in training and guidance, technology, and emphasis on billables. The summer program at Patton Boggs ranked close to the bottom nationally, and third to last in Washington, D.C. Marks in the training and feedback categories were in the bottom five. Some summer associates found the summer program disorganized. Some said that feedback was sparse, and the partners and associates were somewhat remote. Others, though, said they enjoyed the firm for its personality-driven nature and rich political connections. Still, the firm scored at the national average in interest level of work and offer-acceptance. (Responses: 5M, 10S)
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker Job satisfaction at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker ranks an inauspicious 147th place nationally among 34 responding midlevels, who gave the firm marks that were below the national average in virtually every category. In their written comments, midlevels said that although they appreciated the interesting work and level of responsibilty, the firm was disorganized, cheap, and not focused on associate development or satisfaction. A third of the respondents said they were unhappy with their compensation. It ranked eleventh of 15 offices in Los Angeles. Midlevels noted a lack of perks or benefits, outdated technology, pressure to bill hours, and obstacles to doing pro bono work. Above all, midlevels mentioned a lack of mentoring, guidance, and nurturing. Many also felt their future prospects were bleak at the firm. The result, as one put it: "Low morale at this time." Such criticisms came from each of the firm's offices: Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, and Stamford, Connecticut. If you're going to clerk at Paul, Hastings, summer associates recommend the Los Angeles office. They ranked it seventh in L.A., as opposed to the New York office's sixty-first place ranking among New York offices. Complaints about the Big Apple included dull work, and an unpredictably heavy amount of it, and windowless offices. Gripes from Los Angeles, meanwhile, were relatively benign: Some found the offices drab and the firm a bit tight-fisted. (Responses: 34M, 23S)
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison Midlevels at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison don't see much of a future for themselves at the firm. They gave it marks that were well below the national average on our question measuring whether midlevels expect to be at the firm in two years. Burnout may be part of the reason: Paul, Weiss's midlevels say they are logging one of the nation's longest workweeks, 62 hours on average. Part of the problem is what they see as management secrecy, unclear partnership prospects, and a substandard atmosphere. "It's like a dysfunctional family where people are permitted to act out," wrote one of the 26 respondents. In addition, a few respondents said they were dissatisfied with their compensation. The firm ranked 142nd nationally, although several other New York firms were ranked even lower among midlevels. Still, despite the poor overall marks, associates had good things to say about the firm's litigation work, entertainment division, and commitment to public service and pro bono work. Summer associates expressed concern with the long hours expected at the firm. Many liked their summer experience, although they said they could have used more training, feedback, and contact with partners. In addition, several noted the stress on the associates. "Your associates are cracking up because you work them too hard," one summer associate said he imagined telling the managing partner. (Responses: 26M, 47S)
Pennie & Edmonds Not much has improved at Pennie & Edmonds, where satisfaction among midlevels remains entrenched in the bottom 20 nationally. Strong numbers in interest level of work (the firm ranked sixteenth nationally in this category) were the only above-average marks doled out to the firm by its 12 responding midlevels. Chief complaints included the firm's benefits package and the perceived lack of opportunity to make partner. Some respondents also complained of back-biting among partners and a lack of teamwork. The New York office was also said to suffer space and technology problems. Pennie & Edmonds associates did say they were getting a lot of valuable experience, a fact that may have contributed to the fact that the respondents universally said they were not anxious about the future. But summer associates said that the taste of life that they got at the firm left them wanting more. They were impressed with the interesting work, and the firm finished in thirtieth place nationwide in that category. Summer associates were anxious for offers, and the firm ranked fourteenth nationally in that area. "The type of work and level of involvement in projects is excellent," wrote one respondent. "The atmosphere is friendly but focused." (Responses: 12M, 20S)
Pepper Hamilton Pepper Hamilton finished with above national averages in three areas among midlevels who appreciated the diversity of the firm and its laid-back atmosphere. The firm also received well-above-national-average marks for management openness, ranking twenty-seventh, and on midlevels' expectations to stay for at least two more years, ranking thirty-ninth. More than half of the 14 respondents said they were happy with their compensation and said they'd recommend the firm to a friend. In the competitive Philadelphia pack, Pepper Hamilton tied for fourth out of 11 firms. Complaints included long hours and an inequitable assigning process that saddled some associates with overwhelming workloads. The firm received a below average score from the summer crowd. "They need to do a better job of wining and dining," wrote one summer associate, "but I've had a productive, fun, educational summer." In particular, summer associates appreciated being able to try out different practice areas. The feedback was a little weak, however, wrote some. (Responses: 14M, 18S)
Perkins Coie Perkins Coie has some happy campers in its associate ranks. A well-below-average workweek, 53.2 hours, and what some described as an open management style are contributing to the satisfaction. "I appreciate the managing partner's commitment to enriching our experience," raved one midlevel from the firm's Denver office. "The atmosphere is almost too good to be true." Of course, no law firm is perfect, and Perkins Coie is no exception. Billable hours were also said to be over-emphasized, and the firm's score for interest level of work was below the national average. Half of the 15 respondents said the work failed to measure up to their law-school dreams. But summer associates found the work spellbinding, putting the firm in tenth place nationally in interest level of work. Some just wanted more work and responsibility. They also enjoyed the fact that associates seemed happy and had time for lives outside of the office. (Responses: 15M, 12S)
Pillsbury Madison & Sutro Pillsbury Madison & Sutro has taken some steps to improve associate morale, instituting a mentor program and raising pay, but our 23 midlevel respondents say that the jury is still out. As it did last year, the firm earned a below-national-average overall score, with particular softness in training and atmosphere. Some chalked up the problem with the atmosphere to a few unpleasant partners and an inadequate support staff. Still, many respondents expressed cautious optimism about the future and gave the management a well-above average mark for openness, ranking it sixteenth nationally in that category. Twenty-six percent of the respondents said they are actively looking for new jobs, and an above-average percentage of respondents said they expect to leave the firm within two years. Summer associates said they liked the relaxed atmosphere, lack of hierarchy, and the diversity of work available. Some described the firm's management as progressive and visionary, and one liked the "long history and new dynamism" of the firm. (Responses: 23M, 29S)
Pitney, Hardin, Kipp & Szuch Midlevels at Pitney, Hardin, Kipp & Szuch said they feel supported and trained, and they value the sophistication of the work they are doing. But some fault the management of the firm for being too secretive about finances, and the firm also received a below average score in the area of of atmosphere, which was described as stuffy but improving. The partners were described as generally amiable, with a handful who like to "flex their muscles." Some complained about workload inequities, but many said that it was possible to maintain some balance in their lives with the firm's 52.4-hour average workweek. A quarter expressed dissatisfaction with their pay, but none of the respondents said they were looking for a new job at this time. One appreciated perk was good food. The chef in the firm's kitchen has Culinary Institute of America credentials, midlevels reported. The technology in the office also received very high scores. "Overall, being an associate at Pitney is not bad," wrote one respondent. "The perks are fantastic, but there's a lot of hard work and more than a little bit of stress." Summer associates gave the training they received very high marks, ranking it eighteenth in the country. "The transactions are smaller so you get a chance to see the entire deal rather than a tiny portion of a huge deal," one respondent wrote. Many clerks appreciated the "real work" that they were given. On the down side, the atmosphere was ranked in the bottom ten nationwide. (Responses: 15M, 11S)
Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur Midlevel associates at Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur said they like the work and the high level of responsibility they are given and generally feel well treated by the partners. They also found their partnership chances easy to assess, and the firm finished in tenth place in that category. Most respondents said they plan to stay at the firm for at least two years. Such positives combined to place the firm thirty-eighth in the country in midlevel satisfaction. Communication about policies and finances is sometimes a bit confusing, midlevels complained. Some also craved more feedback. Another weak spot was in the firm's attitude towards billable hours, a category in which it scored below average. Summer associates in the Columbus office found the summer program highly structured, and one complained that offers of full-time work are made without a practice-department designation. Two in branch offices said the firm was undergoing growing pains, such as computer glitches. Two also had reservations about the pay-scale. (Responses: 9M, 17S)
Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy Summer associates at Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy praised the atmosphere and ranked Powell, Goldstein fourth among the 12 Atlanta offices in the survey. They said they felt respected and believed that a wide variety of people could succeed at the firm. But they weren't necessarily lining up to accept their full-time offers just yet. One reason is the "blind" hiring-not being told which practice group you'll work in. Other problems, some said, was separation between practice groups and alleged overspecialization. (Responses: 13S)
Proskauer Rose Midlevels at Proskauer Rose painted a fairly dark picture of the firm, with some saying that they feel like dispensable billing units. Partners "don't care if we are happy, as long as we are billing," wrote one of the 12 respondents. Another said that the firm's atmosphere suffers because associates are not expected to stick around for long. The firm received below-average scores in every category. The hours, though above-average nationally, were slightly below the New York average. By and large, associates were content with their colleagues, and some of the work, particularly in the labor, employment, and healthcare areas. But benefits are scant, they said, and associate morale was said to be low. A third of respondents said they are not content with their pay, and 17 percent said they are actively searching for a new job. Overall, the firm ranks among the bottom ten firms among midlevels. The firm also placed in the last ten among summer associates. While clerks said they liked the intelligence of the lawyers, were impressed by its client base, and pleased with the relaxed atmosphere, there were a fair number of complaints. They ranged from an alleged lack of respect shown by some senior associates, social events during the day that kept clerks from getting their work done, and not being exposed to enough practice areas. (Responses: 12M, 18S)
Quarles & Brady Midlevels at Quarles & Brady characterized the firm as friendly, democratic, flexible, and fair. They gave it marks that were above national averages in most categories, and marks that were far above average on whether they plan to stay at the firm for at least two more years. "There's a healthy balance between high-quality work and respect for an outside life," wrote one respondent in the firm's Madison, Wisconsin, office. The most often heard gripe was the emphasis on billable hours. Other complaints were minor: The firm's "inferiority complex," wrote one; the fact that it seems to take associate departures "personally," wrote another. In fact, many respondents were hard-pressed to come up with an answer to our question of what they least like about the firm. The firm earned some fans among its summer associates. They praised the apparent balance in attorneys' lives, the firm's friendliness and the free market system for summer assignments. The program fell somewhat short in feedback, a few said. "No one really knew where they stood until two-thirds of the way through the summer," wrote one. (Responses: 22M, 25S)
Note: Law firms with hypertext links paid a fee to participate in Law.com's law
firm marketing program. Whether or not a firm participates in that program in
no way influences whether the firm appears in the survey, or its ranking.
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
    | ||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
