|
|
|
|
|
|
       |
|
 |  |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
Results By State Firms G-P Reed Smith Shaw & McClay Pittsburgh Midlevel composite score: 3.35 Summer composite score: 4.44 Midlevels at Reed Smith Shaw & McClay praised the firm's management for openness and said they know their partnership chances. In that category, the firm finished in tenth place nationally. Treatment by partners and the interest level of work were also rated above the national averages. However, the atmosphere at the firm was rated slightly below average, and one associate complained that the people were a little "dull." The weakest spot was in training, where the firm ranked 146th. The firm received lavish praise for its benefits and alternative career tracks. Among the popular perks: paid family leave and profit sharing. Nearly all the respondents said they were planning to stay at least two more years, and the majority said they were happy with their compensation. Among summer associates, the firm finished in the top ten nationally on the interest level of work, and training was in the top 20. One respondent reported that the firm's legal writing program was particularly helpful. Still, many were undecided about whether they'd accept full-time offers. One said that people at the firm were too serious; others were unwilling to live in Pittsburgh. (Responses: 7M, 11S) 
Riordan & McKinzie Summer associates ranked Riordan & McKinzie sixteenth out of 21 firms in Los Angeles, and below the national average in many categories. Most respondents said they liked the people and the firm's manageable size. But there were beefs with the summer program, including claims of uneven work flow and lack of feedback. Other complaints included the firm's low national profile and lack of an entertainment practice. (Responses: 8S)
Roberts, Sheridan & Kotel Summer associates at Roberts, Sheridan & Kotel appeared to be of two minds about the firm. On the one hand, the six respondents said the atmosphere was perfect, giving the firm 5s across the board. Training and treatment from associates and partners alike were all in the top quarter surveyed. On the other hand, they ranked it dead last in terms of whether they'd accept a full-time offer. What gives? Two respondents said they wanted a more international atmosphere and practice. One respondent wanted less of a "sports bar ethos." Others said they were just holding out to see what other offers materialize. (Responses: 6S)
Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi Midlevels did not give Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi the rave reviews that it received last year, and nationally, the firm dropped out of the top ten to seventy-fifth place. Respondents this year rated it above average for interest level of work, and they gave it a top-ten grade for training. But they ranked the atmosphere lower than average, with some respondents accusing the firm's partners of greed, suspicion, and favoritism. The firm's policy of circulating lists tallying billable hours was particularly unpopular. Two of the eight respondents said they were dissatisfied with their compensation. Most planned on remaining loyal, however. No respondent was looking for a job, and all of them said they would recommend the firm to a friend. The firm's star has fallen somewhat among summer associates this year as well. They ranked it 174th overall. A Minneapolis respondent said he liked the work but felt embittered by the experience, writing, "They do nothing but highlight the negative; you never hear an encouraging word on an evaluation. The firm is very good at encouraging paranoia." (Responses: 8M, 12S)
Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn & Berman Summer clerks rated Robinson Silverman above the national average and ranked it fifteenth of 61 firms in New York. They said they felt supported and respected and enjoyed the congenial, nonhierarchical atmosphere. "Partners and associates are all here to help you learn," wrote one. The problems tended to be more with the summer program. One wished the assignment system was more structured. Another wanted more guidance in the corporate department. One wanted more pro bono work. One said an offer would be more appealing if there were a rotation system for first-year associates. (Responses: 14S)
Rogers & Wells The only category in which Rogers & Wells scored above the national average was management openness. Scores were especially weak in treatment by partners, training and guidance, and respondents' desire to stay two more years, ranking in the bottom quarter. Four of the 18 respondents said they were actively job-hunting, and the same number said they would not recommend the firm to a job-hunting friend. (The survey was completed before the firm announced its merger with London's Clifford Chance.) One bright spot: Satisfaction with compensation ran high at 94 percent. Summer associates thought the work was interesting, and liked the large summer lunch budget. A few said the assignment system was too political and uneven, and some wanted more guidance. "The summer program lacked consistency and adequate support for summer associates," wrote one. The ones who spent the summer in New York said the air-conditioning was inadequate. (Responses: 18M, 33S)
Ropes & Gray Only a handful of firms scored higher than Ropes & Gray for taking a relaxed attitude toward billable hours, which seemed to more than make up for the fact that midlevel associates there reported the longest workweek among Boston firms. Interesting work in an above-average atmosphere help ameliorate what many said were long and unpredictable hours. Many respondents called the firm a genuine meritocracy that stresses teamwork. The firm ranks twenty-ninth nationally and ninth in Boston among midlevels. The blot on the otherwise sunny landscape was a murky partnership picture, respondents said. "You really don't know where you stand," wrote one. Others felt they had no chance at partnership. Among summer associates, the firm received high marks in training but below-national-average marks for atmosphere. Some found it a bit too cold and formal for their taste. "Wearing anything other than a white shirt draws an alarmingly high number of comments," wrote one. They said that the firm treats its associates decently, paid them well, and that partnership seemed available even to nonrainmakers. (Responses: 33M, 48S)
Rosenman & Colin Pay us more: That was the chorus at Rosenman & Colin, where three of the five responding midlevels said they were dissatisfied with their pay. Ranked in the bottom ten nationally, the firm had scores that were below the national average in every category. The interest level of the work in general was rated far below average and received the second-lowest score among the firms that surveyed. One complained of getting assignments that they believed were more suitable for paralegals. Other numbers reinforced their tale of woe. Two respondents said they are actively job-hunting. None thought the firm would be loyal to them in hard times. Almost no one said they were the type of work they'd dreamed about in law school. Summer associates were in sync with the midlevels. They said they felt patronized by some of the assignments, and described the summer program as poorly run, disorganized, and lacking in mentoring and feedback. Training ranked near the bottom at number 182. However, the firm had a score well above the national average in the important offer-acceptance category. (Responses: 5M, 13S)
Rudnick & Wolfe The management at Rudnick & Wolfe could hardly be more open, midlevels said. They ranked the firm second nationally in this category, and also gave it marks that were far above the national average for discernability of partnership chances, ranking it twenty-second nationally on that question. Overall, they ranked the firm fifteenth in the country, and fifth of 22 in Chicago. Many respondents lauded the firm as having a friendly and informal atmosphere and partners for treating them well. However, the firm's scores were dragged down substantially by low marks for the attitude toward billables, and several respondents singled out the firm's office building for harsh words. Summer associates logged more complaints about the firm's technology than the building, but they said they liked the people and the firm's relaxed atmosphere. Some had quibbles with how the summer program was run-too big of a class, offers made too late, and too much written work. But the firm scored in the top 25 percent in the area of training, and an above-average number of respondents said they would accept an offer of full-time work from the firm. (Responses: 14M, 24S)
Schiff Hardin & Waite A little technologically behind the times, but otherwise a great place to work, said midlevels about Schiff Hardin & Waite. The seven respondents gave the firm above-national-average marks in every other area, sufficiently high scores to earn the firm a sixth-place ranking nationally and first among Chicago offices. "Great work environment, nice, smart people, high-quality work," one wrote. The marks for training ranked first in the country. Two respondents wrote of their appreciation of the firm's policy of encouraging pro bono work. Any complaints? Three respondents said they are not doing the work they envisioned doing when they were in law school. The same number said that stress and long hours were negatively affecting their health. "I am happy here but would like to work a little less," wrote one. Summer clerks rated their experience a little below the national average, and the training that midlevels praised did not trickle down to them. "Despite the open nature, there is no training," wrote one summer associate. "The mentor program has helped socially but not professionally." Some felt there was too much work and that the social events they were also expected to attend made it hard to get it all done. (Responses: 7M, 19S)
Schnader Harrison Segal
& Lewis An open and progressive style of management, congenial colleagues, and good treatment by partners are among the positives that midlevels heralded at Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis. Still, some said that the work is a bit boring, and that the mentoring and training could be improved. One described the work assignment process as disorganized. Many midlevels also said that billable hours receive heavy emphasis, and that partnership chances are different to ascertain. Almost half the respondents said that their compensation was unsatisfactory, and 21 percent said they are actively job-hunting elsewhere. Still, the firm ranked fourth of 11 in Philadelphia. Summer associates also liked the partners and the atmosphere, but they were not necessarily clamoring for offers of full-time work. One did not like the fact that full-time associates must immediately choose a practice area. Another wanted to practice transactional law but thought that the firm was strongest in litigation. Summer clerks liked the work assigned to them, but several said feedback was poor. (Responses: 19M, 17S)
Schulte Roth & Zabel Compared with what their counterparts at other New York law firms log, some midlevels at Schulte & Roth found their hours-57.2 per week, on average-about as reasonable as can be expected. But that was about all that they said they find reasonable. They gave the firm marks that were below the national average in every category except receptiveness to pro bono work, and the firm ended up in the bottom 20 nationally and thirty-fifth of 48 New York offices. Though some respondents said their colleagues were friendly, many complained about the management hierarchy, and, as one put it, "several known bad apples" among the partners. "There's a real morale problem developing here," wrote one. Scores for the interest level of the work were in the lowest quarter in the nation. Comments suggested that while some associates were happy with the responsibilities given them, many felt stuck with dull, uninteresting assignments. Sixty-four percent said the work they are now doing was not what they envisioned in law school. Midlevels also feel stressed out at the firm; 68 percent said it was affecting their health. Summer clerks expressed concerns about associate pay and the perception that management was not responsive to their concerns. But many had a positive evaluation of the summer program, calling the work "challenging" and the events "extravagant." Most also liked the people. Still, the firm's summer associates were a tough audience, ranking the firm in the bottom ten nationally and fifty-seventh out of 61 New York offices. (Responses: 22M, 29S)
Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson Nice partners, friendly colleagues, said responding midlevels in most of the offices of Seyfarth Shaw. "There is a lot of interaction between the partners and associates," wrote one. "Associates are treated with respect and given a lot of responsibility." Many midlevels said that the management was fairly open, and they gave the firm marks that were above the national average in discernability of partnership chances. Most respondents said they planned on staying for another two years, at least. The firm was slammed for placing too much emphasis on billable hours, though, and respondents said that training left something to be desired. Some complained that the firm is too bureaucratic and lacked uniform policies. The office decor in several locations came in for a lot of criticism. "It's a mix between L.A. Law and disco," a Los Angeles midlevel wrote of his office. Free dinners for late nights were a popular perk, and nearly all 34 midlevel respondents said they'd recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. The summer associates said they were ready to sign up for full-time stints. They rated the firm tenth in the nationwide ranks, and seventh on their eagerness to accept offers of full-time work. They said they liked the apparent lack of hierarchy, the work they were assigned, and especially, the atmosphere. Wrote one: "Everyone seems to be in such a good mood." (Responses: 34M, 12S)
Shaw Pittman "I sincerely believe this firm is more fair in its treatment of associates than most," wrote one Shaw Pittman midlevel of his firm. "High-quality legal work is valued above every or most other qualities." Many respondents said they appreciated the casual atmosphere and high energy at the firm, which received above-national-average marks for interesting work, treatment from partners, and management openness. Many also felt the firm respected their lives outside the firm. "People help each other out and don't expect anything in return," wrote one. The firm offers emergency day care, a concierge desk, and an in-house gym, midlevels said. On the minus side, midlevels reported that they could use a little more feedback, and scores for training were the one weak spot. They gave the firm marks that were just slightly above average for discernability of partnership chances. The summer program, however, came in below the national average. Some had qualms about the size, and rapid growth of the firm. A few found the practice areas, and the focus on high-tech, too limited. But others enjoyed their experience: "Laughter in the halls," "no screamers," and "upbeat atmosphere," wrote appreciative summer interns. There was a lot of work, but, as one said, "the good overwhelmingly outweighs the bad." (Responses: 33M, 18S)
Shearman & Sterling One of about a dozen New York firms to receive a midlevel composite score that was above the national average, Shearman & Sterling scored strikingly higher than the national average in the area of a relaxed attitude toward billable hours. In written comments, midlevels wrote glowingly about the caliber and challenge of the work, particularly in mergers and acquisitions, the firm's international reputation, their training, and the workplace environment. Perks helped, too: Fourth-year bonuses, fifth-year partial-pay sabbaticals, and subsidized day care all contributed to the firm's improving associate morale. The most common gripe? Long hours, about 60.8 per week on average. Some of the 39 respondents complained of burnout and uneven workloads. "They exploit hard-working and ambitious associates, while tolerating those who have absolutely nothing to offer, and who do little work of any value," one wrote. Summer clerks wrote that they were concerned about the firm's reputation for long hours, but many said they liked the summer program, in which they were rotated through three departments and were assigned what one called "thought-provoking work." Many also appreciated the sophisticated, international practice of the firm. But there were strong reservations about hours and size, and the firm's overall rating was below the national average. Wrote one: "There's a general feeling of get-out-and-party when you can, because you never know when you're going to have to spend 14 consecutive days indoors." (Responses: 39M, 38S)
Shook, Hardy & Bacon Some midlevels at Shook, Hardy & Bacon said they feel unappreciated and underpaid. "The separation between partners and associates will never narrow without some acknowledgement that we are important to the future of the firm," wrote one of the five respondents. Three said they are dissatisfied with their compensation. Communication at the firm is poor, one wrote, and the firm's score for management openness was in the bottom ten nationally. The firm also received scores that were well below the national average for atmosphere, training and guidance. Nonetheless, a greater-than-average proportion of midlevels said they plan to stay at the firm for at least two more years, and they gave the firm above-national-average marks for discernability of partnership chances. Summer associates gave the firm rave reviews, though. Shook, Hardy ranked twentieth nationally, and it finished seventh for treatment by partners and treatment by associates. Its scores were in the top quarter in all categories except offer-acceptance, where it finished at about the national average. (Responses: 5M, 14S)
Sidley & Austin Midlevels at Sidley & Austin lauded their treatment by partners and wrote favorably of their work and their fellow associates. On the wish list were a bit more feedback and training, better support staff, more interesting work, more certainty about partnership chances, and better coffee. The firm received average marks for communications, but many of the 71 respondents said the firm was trying to make improvements. "Management operated in a black box on many issues, [but] this is improving greatly," wrote one. "Communication channels are opening up." Scores for the clarity of the partnership track were slightly higher than the national average. The combined scores of 112 summer associates from four Sidley offices placed the firm just slightly above the middle of the pack, nationally. The firm was most loved in Los Angeles, where it ranked fifth of 21 in that city. Chicago respondents complained that the summer class was too big, but loved the fact that dress was business casual. New York respondents complained of the pitfalls of being in a branch office, and Washington, D.C., respondents raved about the interesting work. (Responses: 71M, 112S)
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Midlevels at Simpson Thacher rated their chances of staying at the firm for two more years at just above fifty-fifty, well below the national average. Respondents complained of very long hours, inadequate mentoring, management secrecy, and uncertain future prospects. The 62.6-hour average workweek is among the nation's highest. Half of the 30 respondents said they have no mentor at the firm, and many craved more feedback. Half again said the long hours and stress are affecting their health. Thirty percent said they were dissatisfied with their pay. But life at the firm does have its good points. Simpson Thacher received scores that were above the national average for atmosphere, treatment by partners, and interest level of the work. And there was a long list of perks: subsidized gym memberships, subsidized foreign language instruction, free laptops, and a year-round casual Friday dress policy. Summer associates praised the firm, its lawyers, and the work. The atmosphere was civil, many said, though not overly friendly. However, some said partners were not sufficiently available, and the assigning and mentoring systems needed improvement. Some wrote that the summer program lacked cohesion and camaraderie and needed more organized social gatherings. They also said they had gotten a taste of the long hours full-time associates are expected to work, and although the hours were daunting, most said they'd accept offers. (Responses: 30M, 49S)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Not surprisingly, the hours-63.3 of them per week, on average-were the major source of complaints among midlevel associates at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Fortunately, respondents said, those hours are filled with interesting work in an atmosphere that is collegial, exciting, and casual. Several New York respondents said they felt they were working in a true meritocracy, or close to it. Some also expressed appreciation for the firm's pro bono program. Second to the hours, the biggest complaint was what many termed the lack of a realistic shot at partnership. Those complaints kept associate satisfaction hovering somewhat below average. The 77 respondents from the firm's ten offices combined to give the firm below-average scores for management openness, training and guidance, partnership prospects, and the likelihood they'd stay another two years. "The average associate should be given more information about the firm's policies and future strategies, as well as how the firm views that associate in relation to these strategies," wrote one respondent. Generally speaking, Los Angeles respondents gave the firm slightly higher marks than those in Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C. New York summer associates wrote that they were pleasantly surprised by the "dynamic" nature of some Skadden lawyers and how "cool" the clients are. The summer program was praised for being lavish, although a bit alcohol-focused for some respondents. The loose structure of the assigning process left some feeling that they had not sampled enough practice areas. Los Angeles summer associates said they were happy campers, although some wanted more feedback and many criticized the technology. Chicago respondents said they were impressed but overworked. Least happy were the Boston respondents who ranked it last among summer programs in Boston. (Responses: 77M, 95S)
Smith, Gambrell & Russell Many summer clerks at Smith, Gambrell & Russell said they ended up doing more work and working longer hours than they had bargained for. The firm rated below the national average among summer associates and seventh of 12 in firms in Atlanta. Its weakest scores were in the area of interest level of work, a category in which the firm tied for last place in Atlanta. Although most respondents praised the firm's atmosphere and their treatment by full-time associates, their written comments were lukewarm. (Responses: 10S)
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal Many midlevel respondents said that partnership is out of reach at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, and that morale is suffering as a result of that and an "up-or-out" policy. Nearly half of the respondents said they do not expect to be at the firm for more than two years. The firm also received below-national-average marks for atmosphere, emphasis on billables, and receptiveness to pro bono work. Many respondents worried that their firm is becoming more focused on the bottom line-more, as one wrote, like a "New York City firm." More than half of the 20 respondents said they doubted that the firm would be loyal to them in hard times, and more than a quarter said they would not recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. Still, there's a lot to like about the firm, our respondents said. Midlevels praised the lawyers as interesting, the work as sophisticated, and the management as receptive to flexible work arrangements. They also gave the management a score for openness that was much higher than the national average. Summer associates loved the firm, saying that it had a nice balance of sophisticated and prestigious work and a collegial feel. "There are many brilliant and quirky people here," wrote one respondent. And they felt both welcomed and supported. But one thought they were overly sheltered from the reality and long hours of associate life. (The average workweek for summer associates at the firm was 41.8 hours.) Several wrote that they were concerned about the firm's emphasis on billables. (Responses: 20M, 13S)
Squire, Sanders & Dempsey Squire, Sanders & Dempsey's scores took a tumble among midlevels to the bottom 20 percent in the nation this year. What accounts for the fall? Associates bemoaned a perceived decrease in partnership prospects, long hours, the firm's rapid growth, and perceived overemphasis on billables. Midlevels also gave the firm marks that were well below the national average for atmosphere and training and guidance. "I think associates tend to 'burn out' faster than in the 'old days,' " wrote one respondent. Despite the low numbers and murky partnership chances, the firm did well on our question asking midlevels whether they expect to stay at the firm for at least two more years. Most said they plan to stick around, and only two respondents said they are currently job-hunting. Summer associates had some gripes about the summer program, including not being given enough responsibility, rotations that were too short to fully explore a department, a lackluster atmosphere, and too much research and writing. But it also had its fans, and most respondents said they liked the lawyers at the firm. (Responses: 21M, 20S)
Steel Hector & Davis By most indices, it was an above-average summer at Steel Hector & Davis. The best part about it, associates said, was the atmosphere, which ranked fourteenth nationally. They praised the diversity of the firm, their treatment, and the firm's lawyers. A few respondents thought that the firm had overhired for the summer and recommended that the firm hone its recruiting next year. Others loved the firm but were not sure the practice areas were right for them. The biggest reservation expressed was that the starting salaries for first years was perceived as too low; still, Steel Hector finished in the top 20 percent nationally on our offer-acceptance question. (Responses: 12S)
Steptoe & Johnson Partnership angst appears to be plaguing some midlevels at Steptoe & Johnson. The firm received some of the nation's lowest scores for clarity of partnership prospects. "At this stage, I really don't know where I stand," one respondent wrote. On the bright side, the firm received above-national-average marks in the areas of treatment by partners, overall atmosphere, and management openness. Some midlevels gave the firm points for trying to address associate concerns and taking steps to boost morale, including building an on-site gym and implementing a summertime casual dress policy. Respondents were somewhat less enamored with the work they were doing; one called it "boring." The firm also received scores that were lower than the national average for its emphasis on billables. Summer associates said they appreciated the effort put into the summer program, and what one called the firm's sane and friendly atmosphere. "I haven't bought lunch yet," wrote one. "The firm pays each time any associate takes a summer associate out to lunch." They did notice that full-time associates seemed to be working rather hard, and some were frustrated at not being able to get assignments in their area of interest. (Responses: 17M, 16S)
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan Midlevels at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan said they like their fellow associates and that the firm is less of a sweatshop than some in New York City. But a few did not think highly of the partners. "Associates get zero information and have zero input in the management and direction of the firm," wrote one of the ten respondents. Half said they do not expect to be at the firm in two years, and four said they are actively looking for work elsewhere. Respondents gave the firm lower-than-national-average scores for interest level of work and training and guidance. But summer associates had a decidedly different reaction to the firm, putting it in fourteenth place nationally on our offer-acceptance question, and eleventh of 61 in New York overall. They perceived it as a firm that offers a high quality of life, where the people were friendly, open, and helpful. A few wanted speedier feedback and more rotation through the departments, though. (Responses: 10M, 16S)
Sullivan & Cromwell Sullivan & Cromwell midlevels reported putting in some of the longest hours in the nation, 67.8 on average per week. That's the downside. But the upside is that they generally like their work and the responsibility they are given, and the firm's prestige, deals, and clients, and the intelligence of the firm's lawyers. One of the 31 respondents wrote appreciatively of "high-quality, interesting work that is in the public eye." The firm scored well above the national average for having a reasonable approach to billable hours, finishing eighth in the country on that question, and a bit above the national average for receptivity to pro bono work. Complaints about compensation were few. Sullivan & Cromwell was not necessarily a place where midlevels planned to stay for long, though. Fifty percent of respondents, an above-average proportion, said they plan to leave the firm within two years, and 19 percent said they are looking for jobs elsewhere. Working at Sullivan & Cromwell is a "resume-builder," one respondent noted. Summer associates said they were impressed with the firm's clients, and many liked the fact that they were given responsible work and allowed to choose their assignments. Some thought the summer class was too big, making it easy to fall through the cracks, and a few said they had trouble getting the assignments they wanted. The number one complaint was hours-summer associates reported an average workweek of 51.1 hours. (Responses: 31M, 41S)
Sullivan & Worcester Summer associates gave Sullivan & Worcester a ranking of fortieth nationwide, and sixth of 14 in Boston. Their appreciation for the firm itself showed in the first-place ranking of the firm on our offer-acceptance question.They also ranked it 18th nationally in the area of training and guidance. "Partners and associates are helpful and willing to teach as well as having high expectations," wrote one. Several also praised the firm's encouraging attitude toward family life. (Responses: 7S)
Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Midlevels at Sutherland Asbill & Brennan told a tale of two cities. Midlevels at the firm's Atlanta office are the happy ones; the work, treatment from partners, atmosphere and training are all above average, they said. They wrote appreciatively of a flexible workplace, where face time is not important, and associates receive respectful treatment from partners. "Most partners seem to take a real interest in your development as a young lawyer," wrote an Atlanta respondent. "The feeling conveyed is that they want you to stick around and become one of them." In Atlanta, the firm ranked number one. It was a whole different story in Washington, D.C., where some midlevels wrote of an "exodus of associates." A smattering said the firm was too bureaucratic and that the technology and support staff were poor. There were also a few complaints about management secrecy and too much emphasis on billables. The firm's ranking among firms with Washington offices was thirteenth of 34. In contrast, summer associates in the capital were more impressed than their Atlanta counterparts, although both groups found a lot to like. In Atlanta, summer associates said the firm was "classy" and praised the summer program as "realistic." The complaints focused on technology and the lack of socializing after work. In Washington, respondents liked the people and the caliber of the work. Summer associates there said they were more likely to accept offers of full-time associateships than their Atlanta counterparts were: The Washington office received a score of 4.4 on this question (above the national average of 4.2), while the Atlanta office received a very low score of 3.6. (Responses: 26M, 34S)
Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault Few firms beat Testa Hurwitz & Thibeault in midlevel training. The firm's in-house education program was called "outstanding" by its midlevels. Survey respondents also gave the work higher-than-national-average scores and praised the clients, many of which are high-tech start-ups. The firm also stood out for its low-key attitude towards billable hours. But other areas were weaker. Management was rated rather tight-lipped about the firm's policies and finances and the firm scored below the national average for overall atmosphere. Respondents also found the partnership track murkier than the average firm's. Among firms with Boston offices, Testa ranked just tenth of 13. Among summer associates the firm fared better: it was fifth of 14 Boston firms. In their comments, summer associates praised the atmosphere as relaxed and unpretentious and liked the progressive work the firm does. "There is a strong absence of office politics and the firm is run by common sense," wrote one. (Responses: 16M, 28S)
Thacher Proffitt & Wood A majority of the midlevel respondents at Thacher Proffitt & Wood said they were dissatisfied with their compensation. Still, none admitted to active job-hunting. The nine respondents rated the firm's atmosphere above average, calling it friendly, nonhierarchical, and casual, but found other aspects wanting. The interest level of the work received one of the lowest scores among the firms surveyed, and six respondents said the work did not measure up to their law school vision. Management openness was also ranked well below the national average. Some thought the place was just managed poorly. One consistent lament was that the work assignment system was disorganized and produced an inequitable distribution of work. No one complained about the hours, however, which were just a shade below the national average, and low for New York. One respondent thought the lawyers at the firm needed to work harder.v Summer interns ranked this firm third in the city and fourth nationally for interest level of the work. The summer program achieved a good balance between social activities and work, they said. Many expressed gratitude for the opportunity to work at the firm and said they hoped to be hired.v (Responses: 9M, 15S)
Thelen Reid & Priest "The partners only expect what they themselves are willing to give," wrote one New York midlevel, helping to explain the firm's high score for treatment from partners. The atmosphere also was rated above average and generally praised. The hours, at least by New York standards, were not too bad at an average of 57 per week, just a tad below the national average. But there were some negatives that pulled the overall midlevel score below the national average. The work-interest level and training both left something to be desired. More than half of the 18 respondents said they did not have a mentor, and several said they were actively job-hunting. In all of the firm's three offices (New York, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco) midlevel and summer associates alike griped about the office technology. But unlike the midlevels, summer associates thought the training was great. They praised the system of getting assignments directly from the firm's partners, the accessibility of the full-time associates, and the helpfulness of summer program and recruiting coordinators. (Responses: 18M, 23S)
Thompson Hine & Flory Midlevels at Thompson Hine & Flory like the work and the responsibility they are given. Many thought the firm manages to strike the right balance of being cordial, professional, personable, and hardworking. The firm's overall score among midlevels improved significantly over last year's. The emphasis on billable hours remains a problem, though things have improved slightly since last year when the firm ranked last. Several respondents called the part-time system a failure, and said that the firm needed to do more to retain women lawyers with families. Many summer associates said they liked the friendly noncompetitive atmosphere at the firm. Several thought the summer program succeeded in giving them a candid look at what a full-time associate can expect. For some it might have been too realistic. They felt swamped with work. But overall, they must have liked what they saw, since most said they'd accept an offer. (Responses: 24M, 15S)
Troutman Sanders Midlevels at Troutman Sanders reported being somewhat content, but worried. They still gave the firm high marks for interesting work, atmosphere, and management openness. But some said the firm's focus is shifting to billable hours, and that it is losing its claim to be a firm that offers associates a good "quality of life." Half of the 10 respondents said the stress and the hours were taking a toll on their health. Both training and the work assignment process needed attention, respondents said. Three expressed dissatisfaction with compensation. Still, most said they were likely to stay at least two years, and just one was job hunting. Some of the criticism of the firm by summer associates was harsh: "This firm went from a comfortable place to an impersonal machine, bent on 'selling' itself to the summer associates because of its need for new worker bees," wrote one. "The firm needs more substance and less flash." Still, many praised the atmosphere and balance between work and outside life at the firm. (Responses: 10M, 20S)
Vedder, Price, Kaufman & Kammholz Vedder, Price, Kaufman & Kammholz received above-average results in several areas, including treatment from partners, interest level of work, training and guidance, receptiveness to pro bono work, and discernability of partnership chances. The eight respondents also said the odds were good that they'd still be at the firm in two years, and most said they were doing the sort of work they envisioned as law students. All of the midlevel respondents said they would recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. "I've been given a great deal of responsibility and active feedback," wrote one. Still, a few complained about their compensation and the firm scored below-average for emphasis on billable hours. Summer associates, meanwhile, were completely wowed by the firm and ranked it first in the country with mostly perfect marks. They praised the interest level and variety of work, the substantive responsibility they were given, the client contact, and the respect accorded them. "Our opinions are taken seriously," wrote one. They said the firm's lawyers were talented and good-natured people who have lives outside of the office. They praised the recruiting department and the social activity schedule. Not one complained about the pay, and all were ready to sign up as full-time associates. (Responses: 8M, 11S)
Venable, Baetjer and Howard At least the associates at Venable, Baetjer and Howard know where they stand more than their counterparts at most other firms do. Deciphering one's partnership chances was one of four categories in which the firm received scores that were above the national average. (The others were technology, attitude toward pro bono work, and the two-year prognosis for staying at the firm.) In their written comments, four midlevels accused the firm's management of paying only lip service to their concerns. "Partners routinely solicit associate input, then blatantly ignore all suggestions," wrote one. A few said they were unhappy with their compensation, and two reported that they'd steer a job-seeking friend away. Summer associates liked the firm but said they were underwhelmed by its summer program. They needed more choice in their assignments and more feedback, some said. Several respondents in the firm's Washington, D.C., office complained that their pay fell below local standards and said that the program was disorganized and in need of an overhaul. (Responses: 8M, 19S)
Venture Law Group Summer associates praised the innovative outlook of the Venture Law Group, its technology, and its focus on start-up companies. "Its philosophy is beyond progressive," wrote one. While they praised the firm's business model, one thought the summer program was not up to snuff. "There are useless made-up research and writing assignments that are a waste of everyone's time," this respondent wrote. "Associates and partners are too busy to explain projects to you." Some also said there was not enough socializing. (Responses: 17S)
Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson and Hand Only five firms scored higher for interesting work, which contributed to Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson's above-average score. And when we asked whether respondents expect to stay around for at least two more years, the firm ranked third nationwide. But other scores were less than stellar. Particular weak spots were the emphasis on billable hours, atmosphere, and management openness about firm finances and strategies. A few of the five respondents complained that the stress of their jobs was affecting their health. (Responses: 5M)
Vinson & Elkins The good news is that Vinson & Elkins's midlevel respondents gave the firm the eighth-highest score in the country for management openness about firm finances and strategies. Scores for treatment from partners, atmosphere, training and guidance, and attitude toward pro bono work were also above average, and many had good things to say about their colleagues. The bad news is the emphasis on billables, where the firm's scores were well below the national average. One respondent wrote that there is a "mentality that everyone is billing big hours so you need to as well." In addition, partnership chances were seen as scant. Summer associates praised the personalities of the attorneys and said they enjoyed working with them. A few clerks in the Dallas office said they wanted more feedback on their work. Many in the Houston office felt somewhat overwhelmed by the size of the firm, but said they liked the people they had gotten to know and found the work intellectually stimulating. (Responses: 39M, 53S)
Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease If not for management's reticence about firm finances and strategies, some complaints about stinginess, and a work week that's a bit on the long side, Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease would be a truly outstanding place to work, our eight midlevel respondents said. As it is, they gave the firm high marks for treatment from partners, training and guidance, atmosphere, attitude toward billable hours, pro bono opportunities, and discernability of partnership chances. All of our respondents said they thought the firm would be loyal to them in hard times. The firm also got the country's top score on receptiveness to pro bono activities. Overall, it ranked thirty-fifth among midlevels. Why, then, were a few of the respondents actively looking for a new job? Specific complaints included the small spread between starting and midlevel salaries, and the lack of day care or part-time options for working mothers. Summer associates said they were impressed with the firm, but they ranked the interest level of the work lower than the national average. A few thought the assignments were not diverse enough, and others were annoyed that they weren't allowed to see their evaluation forms. Two thought the firm was too traditional and conservative. But most respondents lavishly praised the firm's atmosphere, partner-associate collegiality, and what they perceived as good propects for partnership. (Responses: 8M, 23S)
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz Seventy hours a week-and loving it: That could be the mantra of midlevels at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. The ten respondents raved about their experience, despite the fact that they put in some of the most grueling hours in the country. (The firm's average midlevel workweek was 68.2 hours.) Overall, the firm ranked second among those with offices in New York, a city in which many firms rank in the bottom quarter of the survey, and nationwide, it finished in a very respectable thirty-first place. "The type of work is outstanding, and the compensation is second-to-none," wrote one associate, echoing the thoughts of many. "Associates are treated well, generally, and given tremendous responsibility." Added another: "Hands down, if you're going to practice law, it doesn't get any better than this." Respondents said they were fully satisfied with their work, and all expected that the firm would be loyal to them in hard times. None said they were looking for another job, and nine out of ten said they would recommend it to a friend. The firm tied for first place nationally for its relaxed approach toward billable hours. There was the stress factor, though: Half of the respondents said that long hours and the stress of their jobs were taking some toll on their health. For some summer interns, both the firm and summer program were just a little too serious, and the firm received scores that were below the national average for training and atmosphere. "The single-mindedness of the place detracts from the otherwise decent collegiality of the place," wrote one. "There should be more chatting in the halls, more spontaneity." But most respondents were extremely impressed. "Everything radiates quality," wrote one. One said the only downside was that being around such brilliant people all day could be exhausting. (Responses: 10M, 21S)
Weil, Gotshal & Manges One midlevel respondent gave Weil, Gotshal & Manges credit for trying to overcome what he called its "nasty reputation." But for a few who complained of mistreatment at the hands of partners and senior associates, the efforts were not a success. Although some of the 12 respondents lauded the firm as honest and open, Weil, Gotshal still scored below the national average for treatment from partners, work-interest level, training, and atmosphere. A third of the respondents were looking for new jobs. Even more said they were dissatisfied with their compensation and would steer a job-seeking friend away from the firm. More than half said the stress and long hours of their jobs were affecting their family and social lives. Summer associates, by and large, were ready to sign up for stints as full-time associates, although they had some criticisms of the summer program. Two cited inconsistent feedback and the inability to get the kind of work they wanted. But respondents liked the firm's high-profile work, its work hard-play hard atmosphere, and its location near Central Park. (Responses: 12M, 39S)
White & Case Midlevels at White & Case gave their firm a score that was above the national average for interest level of work, but it was all downhill from there. Many of the 13 respondents complained about long hours (the average midlevel workweek at the firm was 63.3 hours), and said that management either failed to communicate the importance of billables or sent mixed signals. Relations with some partners were described as fractious. (These midlevels were surveyed about two months after the collapse of merger talks between Brown & Wood and White & Case.) Summer associates, though, had some good things to say about their program: flexible rotations, the interesting international practice, and friendly people all were singled out for praise. They also had quite a few criticisms: lack of training and feedback, overbearing partners, and alleged stinginess about office supplies. They noticed that the midlevel associates were unhappy, and a few wrote that if the firm treated its midlevels as well as its summer associates, the problem would be solved. (Responses: 13M, 58S)
Whitman Breed Abbott & Morgan Summer associates at Whitman Breed Abbott & Morgan said they were disappointed with the work they were assigned. A few lamented the lack of corporate assignments, while others said they were so busy with research and writing that they barely had time to meet their fellow summer interns. Three of the nine clerks complained that the class was too small to handle all the work that was expected of them. Although they ranked their overall experience and training below average nationally, the summer associates said the full-time associates couldn't have been nicer, and the firm ranked seventh nationally in that area. (Responses: 9S)
Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon Great atmosphere, but poor prospects for staying: That was the capsule review of Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon from the seven responding midlevels. One credited the firm with fostering a "sense of family" and a "high level of honesty and integrity." Management got above- average scores for openness. But still associate attrition was reported to be high, and the firm scored below the national average on whether respondents plan to stay at their firms for two more years. A few respondents said they already were job hunting. Why leave such a congenial place? Some said they were troubled by a growing emphasis on billable hours, and others said they were unclear about their partnership chances. Summer associates gave the firm rave reviews, ranking it thirty-sixth nationally and sixth of 24 in Chicago. They described a relaxed and professional environment where people seemed to genuinely enjoy working together. They praised the variety of assignments, the respect shown to them, and their access to management. (Responses: 7M, 14S)
Wiley, Rein & Fielding Many associates at Wiley, Rein & Fielding liked their fellow associates, but they split on whether they had good relationships with partners. The firm scored below average for atmosphere and treatment from partners. "The truth of the matter is that billable hours are king," wrote one respondent. "Overall, there seems to be a sentiment that associates are supposed to be unhappy," wrote another. Most respondents said they were satisfied with their compensation. But that was not enough to keep them from job hunting. Nearly one-fifth of the 26 respondents were actively searching. Some felt saddled with a large amount of insurance work, the firm's biggest practice area, even though they'd hoped to practice in another area when they joined the firm. Summer associates were sold. They ranked the firm in the top 20 nationally, and fourth of 35 in Washington, D.C. "I don't understand how this firm received such low rankings in past years," wrote one, who went on to praise the people, the work, and the recruiting staff through the liberal use of exclamation points. Many liked the free-market assigning system. A few were bothered by what they said was the firm's strong Republican affiliation and its emphasis on insurance defense work. (Responses: 26M, 13S)
Willkie Farr & Gallagher Scores for Willkie Farr & Gallagher came in below-average nationally, but not by much. And by New York standards it did well enough, ranking sixteenth overall in that city. The atmosphere is good, but more structured training would help, said the midlevel respondents. "Since the firm has such a 'friendly' atmosphere, it chooses not to train associates but rather believes that the open-door policy somehow encourages training," one explained. Respondents said that their partnership chances were tough to gauge and that management was tight-lipped about firm finances and strategies. "I could be out on my butt tomorrow, or be made partner," wrote one. "Either way, I'd have no idea today." The firm got points both for its pro bono efforts and a lower-than-average emphasis on billable hours. All 20 respondents said they were happy with their compensation, though one groused that the dinner allowance was too small. Citing the "relentlessly pleasant" atmosphere and egalitarian ethos, summer associates ranked Willkie twenty-ninth nationally and eighth of 61 in New York. Many thought that the program's rotation system was a good idea, although some thought its two-week rotations were too short. Clerks who already knew the area of practice in which they want to work said they were frustrated by the rotations. (Responses: 20M, 36S)
Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering's midlevels told by-and-large happy tales of their work experience, but they were a little less expansive about the firm's pluses than last year and some said they fear that change is in the wind. The work and atmosphere still ranked above average, and the intelligence and congeniality of the lawyers was often cited. The firm still offers its associates a "manageable" lifestyle, midlevels said. Some described the atmosphere as academic and even pleasantly nerdy, but they worried that it was becoming more bottom-line-oriented, as evidenced by what one called "willingness to take on uninteresting work to increase billables." Another worried about a perceived shift away from pro bono work, writing, "The culture of the firm is changing dramatically." Many of the summer associates raved about the events and the assignments. An atmosphere of respect and kindness pervades the firm, many said, although a few described it as a little too elitist and focused on Ivy League pedigrees. Critics also cited concerns about the firm's size and growth and worries that it would adopt a billable hours requirement. (Responses: 18M, 29S)
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati They're tired as hell, and they're not going to take it any more: Midlevels at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati seemed to be reaching a Network level of anger over their workload, even though their average workweek, 60.6 hours, was above the national average but not the nation's longest. Many of the 26 respondents complained that the firm's high-tech client base is growing too fast. The work is interesting, but enough already, they said, urging management to hire more lawyers or turn down more work. Even though Wilson associates reported receiving the nation's highest compensation, the midlevels gave the firm below-average scores for satisfaction with compensation. Chalk it up to the high cost of life in Silicon Valley. Midlevels could also use more training, they said, giving some of the lowest scores in that area. Wrote one, ominously: "Teach me something so that I don't feel I'm committing malpractice daily." Some respondents appreciated the Wilson Sonsini prestige and pedigree. However, an above-average number of respondents said they were planning to take it elsewhere in the next two years, and the firm scored weakly on our retention question. Summer associates were a little more mellow. "Excellent summer program; interesting work, and abundant social events," wrote one summer associate, summing up the thoughts of many. They liked that they were given a lot of responsibility early. Some found the firm a little too free-form in assigning work and giving feedback. Some said the firm's big size made it a bit impersonal and worried that it was growing too fast. (Responses: 26M, 34S)
Winston & Strawn Winston & Strawn's results in most survey categories were average or just below national averages. The only two areas where it rated better than average were technology and receptivity to pro bono projects, and the firm was ranked just average in atmosphere and treatment by partners. The 42 respondents gave varied descriptions of the firm's social climate. Some described it as stuffy, hierarchical, and overly political; others found it civil and collegial. The work itself, rated somewhat below the national average overall, also got mixed reviews. Some respondents thought that associates did not get enough responsibility or experience, although others described it as exciting and top-notch. The scores for training were average, although one respondent wrote that it could be detrimental to one's career to ask for guidance. Some wrote that they needed more information about what was expected of them and what their partnership chances were. Respondents said the summer program at Winston & Strawn is highly structured, and while some summer associates commended that, a few bristled. Several thought that they could have used more feedback, but overall, they gave the firm high marks for training. (Responses: 42M, 53S)
Winthrop Stimson Putnam & Roberts Winthrop Stimson Putnam & Roberts posted strong scores for treatment by partners (it ranked fourth nationally in that area), interest level of work, and atmosphere. Overall, the firm ranked third among New York offices and in the top quarter nationally. The biggest blot was discernability of partnership prospects: Most said their partnership chances were not clear. Still, the percentage who said they expect to stay at the firm for at least two more years was above the national average, and most of the respondents said they were happy with their compensation. Every midlevel respondent said they would recommend the firm to a job-seeking friend. At this firm, it was the summer associates who were the tough critics: They gave the firm an overall rating that was below the national average. The weakest spots were the interest level of the work and treatment by full-time associates. Wrote one: "The nice people always seem to be leaving, and [management doesn't] really seem all that concerned." (Responses: 12M, 22S)
Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen Midlevels at Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen gave the firm very respectable rankings overall: third among Philadelphia offices and forty-first place nationally. Midlevels wrote of feeling valued and said they sense that the firm cares about them both professionally and personally. They appreciated the firm's recent move to a new building, its relaxed atmosphere, year-round casual Friday dress code, the close working relationships they have with other lawyers, and level of responsibility given them. Most respondents said they want to stick around: The firm finished in the top 20 nationally on whether associates plan to stay at the firm for another two years. Summer associates at the firm were a pretty happy lot. Some wanted more challenging work, and one wanted more social events, but most thought the work environment was excellent. Many said they were pleased to see that attorneys at the firm could live balanced lives. (Responses: 17M, 14S)
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
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
    | ||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
