Anonymous User wrote:Npret wrote:Toni V wrote:Npret wrote:Toni V wrote:nick417 wrote:Toni V wrote:When someone joins a firm, the firm immediately places them on a partnership track but not everyone manages to “cut it.” This is true in all professions. Not everyone ends up playing on the first-string.
There is some truth to this: a good firm should make a hiring decision based on whether it could imagine this person being a partner. If the answer is no, have to consider why you are hiring this person.
But the "cut it" makes it sound like every individual has an equal opportunity to make partner. This is definitely not the case. My firm (a 600+ attorney firm) promotes 4-5 new partners a year. Making partner is more random and can be based on factors outside of your control such as what practice group you are assigned to or assignments you obtain.
I partially agree with your assessment....making partner is far from a sure thing. But yes, some will not “cut it,” while others may fall by the wayside for the reasons you pointed out.
Trivia in ref to this topic. 58% of our presidents were lawyers. 57% of our US Senators are lawyers.
No one is looking at which first years will make partner. I don’t know why you keep throwing out incorrect and irrelevant information.
Does it bother you that law school is a terrible choice for many people? I don’t understand why you want to deny reality.
It may be a poor choice for some but a WONDERFUL choice for many others! Stepping out of school into an immediate six fig income is reality.
If all you want is to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and 3 years for a shot at a 6 figure job, then go for it. If you measure that as success then I think you and others are being very shortsighted. At least calculate how many years you need to work to break even.
Dunno why this is so difficult a concept for a lot of people. Sticker is almost never worth it. If you have good stats then your #1 priority should be to get a substantial if not full scholarship to reduce your COA. If your gpa is high enough take the LSAT until you get a T13 full ride. Then you will get the best of both worlds as far as minimal debt and tremendous odds at making $180K right out of law school. This is what I did and I’m already richer than if I had worked my shit pre-law job for the last four years. If your gpa is outside the range or after a lot of effort the LSAT just isn’t crossing into that 170s then a full ride to a good regional is still a great bet to improve your career prospects as your downside to missing biglaw is low, and paying some tuition to a T13 may not be so bad depending on your risk aversion and career alternatives. Just don’t pay sticker. But people here should stop pretending the alternatives are pay sticker or don’t go. This is a faulty assumption people keep making that ignores where the bulk of value in attending law school lies.
I’m not pretending anything. I paid nothing for law school between scholarships and family money earmarked for my education because I went to undergrad on scholarships. What I’m addressing is the idea that just because the initial biglaw salary is high, law school is worth it.
Most people don’t see beyond the dollar signs of being a first year without considering debt, getting laid off, hating the work, needing sleep, being on call with little control, cancelling plans, etc.
Law was good for me- though I started out as a striver, I learned it wasn’t enough for me after getting ill, etc. I was lucky I had great partners that liked me from the beginning and I always was able to do good timely work under pressure.
I saw people who lasted less than a year, people who got fired without ever having bad reviews, and others who stayed hating it and doing the minimum they could because they owed a fortune, but the minimum still consumed them. Lots of divorces, affairs and unhappy spouses and children too. Many biglaw lawyers would not send their kids into the same career because they have seen how it’s changed over time.
This thread has been too rosy, shortsided, and unrealistic based on my experience and my observations of others.
I feel the loss of experienced voices has crippled the quality of advice here.