Biglaw client interaction experience Forum

[Excellent117]

The time I told John he couldn't go to the bathroom, it was already two o'clock on the day the quotes were expiring, and I was still chasing down the last two signatures on my end, so it really was going down to the wire.

Ohhhhhhh, I see.

Then that makes it entirely reasonable that you told someone they were not allowed to take two minutes to do one of the three things that you actually need to do to continue living. Totally normal.

I always come back to this: every single person should have to work at least a year in retail or the service industry. I think it would help prevent people acting like total sociopaths as soon as they have someone working under them.

Oh grow up. Do you think biglaw is paying a first year associate fresh out of law school $190k/yr because their legal acumen is so great? First year associates get paid a ridiculous amount of money to be there to do grunt work whenever they're needed.
If John wanted a job where he could go to the toilet whenever he wanted, McDonalds is always hiring.

If a deal didn't close, nobody made any money. We were paying the law firm stupid money, and we were paying it for exactly one reason and one reason only: the bank needed the law firm's reputation and malpractice insurance to sign off on due diligence BEFORE funds could be sent.

And, by the way, if you think that's particular to biglaw, that's not true. Big Four accounting firms and bulge bracket investment banks are just as bad, but their starting pay is lower. I've seen associates pull allnighters over Christmas and New Year, because that's the job. If you're not willing to do it, there are thousands of people who'd happily take your job for less money.
Generally speaking, 20-somethings don't have the skill-sets to command six-figure salaries; those high-paying jobs are paying for their availability.

It's hilarious that you think this kind of behavior makes it more likely that an associate is going to go above and beyond to help you cover up your mistakes rather than less likely.

[FND]

It's hilarious that you think this kind of behavior makes it more likely that an associate is going to go above and beyond to help you cover up your mistakes rather than less likely.

I don't make mistakes.... that I try to cover up. I own them and fix them.
I also fix other people's mistakes, and I've saved several attorneys from a malpractice suit without ever bothering to tell them, because, surprisingly, it's not about who's wrong or what mistakes were made, it's about closing the deal.

That's what matters in a transactional practice - figuring out how to get the deal closed so everyone can get paid.

[+] Spoiler

and making sure you're not the one standing in the way of the deal getting closed. Blowing a deadline is unacceptable in that world. Likewise, if you find a problem, you're the bearer of bad news. If you find a problem and come up with a solution, you're a hero. And that's the difference between a good lawyer, and a great lawyer.

[abiglawyer]

It's hilarious that you think this kind of behavior makes it more likely that an associate is going to go above and beyond to help you cover up your mistakes rather than less likely.

I don't make mistakes.... that I try to cover up. I own them and fix them.
I also fix other people's mistakes, and I've saved several attorneys from a malpractice suit without ever bothering to tell them, because, surprisingly, it's not about who's wrong or what mistakes were made, it's about closing the deal.

That's what matters in a transactional practice - figuring out how to get the deal closed so everyone can get paid.

[+] Spoiler

and making sure you're not the one standing in the way of the deal getting closed. Blowing a deadline is unacceptable in that world. Likewise, if you find a problem, you're the bearer of bad news. If you find a problem and come up with a solution, you're a hero. And that's the difference between a good lawyer, and a great lawyer.

Mods, out this guy. He's obviously trolling at this point.

[cavalier1138]

It's hilarious that you think this kind of behavior makes it more likely that an associate is going to go above and beyond to help you cover up your mistakes rather than less likely.

I don't make mistakes.... that I try to cover up. I own them and fix them.
I also fix other people's mistakes, and I've saved several attorneys from a malpractice suit without ever bothering to tell them, because, surprisingly, it's not about who's wrong or what mistakes were made, it's about closing the deal.

That's what matters in a transactional practice - figuring out how to get the deal closed so everyone can get paid.

[+] Spoiler

and making sure you're not the one standing in the way of the deal getting closed. Blowing a deadline is unacceptable in that world. Likewise, if you find a problem, you're the bearer of bad news. If you find a problem and come up with a solution, you're a hero. And that's the difference between a good lawyer, and a great lawyer.

Mods, out this guy. He's obviously trolling at this point.

For real. He hasn't provided any identifying info (unless we seriously think that it's easy to identify a random finance-bro who has corporate law experience).

[QContinuum]

I've perused the thread and outed a number of posts for anon abuse.

FND's posts ITT arguably come close to the line where we'd ordinarily respect a poster's decision to stay anonymous. However, I outed them on "public policy" grounds because the posts in question advocate behavior that violates basic norms of human decency.

[Npret]

I've perused the thread and outed a number of posts for anon abuse.

FND's posts ITT arguably come close to the line where we'd ordinarily respect a poster's decision to stay anonymous. However, I outed them on "public policy" grounds because the posts in question advocate behavior that violates basic norms of human decency.

Thanks

[californiauser]

The time I told John he couldn't go to the bathroom, it was already two o'clock on the day the quotes were expiring, and I was still chasing down the last two signatures on my end, so it really was going down to the wire.

Ohhhhhhh, I see.

Then that makes it entirely reasonable that you told someone they were not allowed to take two minutes to do one of the three things that you actually need to do to continue living. Totally normal.

I always come back to this: every single person should have to work at least a year in retail or the service industry. I think it would help prevent people acting like total sociopaths as soon as they have someone working under them.

Oh grow up. Do you think biglaw is paying a first year associate fresh out of law school $190k/yr because their legal acumen is so great? First year associates get paid a ridiculous amount of money to be there to do grunt work whenever they're needed.
If John wanted a job where he could go to the toilet whenever he wanted, McDonalds is always hiring.

If a deal didn't close, nobody made any money. We were paying the law firm stupid money, and we were paying it for exactly one reason and one reason only: the bank needed the law firm's reputation and malpractice insurance to sign off on due diligence BEFORE funds could be sent.

And, by the way, if you think that's particular to biglaw, that's not true. Big Four accounting firms and bulge bracket investment banks are just as bad, but their starting pay is lower. I've seen associates pull allnighters over Christmas and New Year, because that's the job. If you're not willing to do it, there are thousands of people who'd happily take your job for less money.
Generally speaking, 20-somethings don't have the skill-sets to command six-figure salaries; those high-paying jobs are paying for their availability.

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve seen on this forum and that’s saying a lot. Needing your lawyers to pull all nighters to close deals on tight timelines is not the same thing as telling someone they can’t use the bathroom.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone comment on the banker-lawyer relationship in M&A/RX? Despite how shitty it is, it makes sense why bankers feel entitled to shit on cap markets/finance attorneys considering that they’re the clients. In M&A/RX, lawyers and bankers share the same client, so one would think this wouldn’t happen nearly as much.

[Anonymous User]

In RX, and I’ve never experienced anything like this. Lawyers usually run the show in RX and even in situations where it’s more equal, the bankers definitely aren’t your boss. Some partners in RX can be tough, but you really see nothing like this from clients. Honesty, can’t think of single horror story where a client remotely treated you like this.

Obviously not in M&A, but many friends are, and haven’t really heard stories like this either. I’ve heard of some clients being crazy with deadlines, so could see something like this more likely to happen, but it wouldn’t be from the bankers.

Only situation this makes sense to me is debt finance/debt capital markets, where the actual client is a financial institution. Fellow advisors can be tough on don’t each other, but can’t see anything like this happening.

[nealric]

I'm not in banking, but as a F500 client, I've never felt the need to behave remotely like what FND seems to think is necessary- even in stressful and deadline-critical M&A deals.

It's fine to let an associate know that things are at a critical stage and their immediate availability might be needed. But telling them not to attend to personal needs is way over the line. Nor is it going to be helpful to anyone to call every 5 minutes- nobody can work effectively that way.

[lavarman84]

Capital markets associate at a V10. Deals with bankers on a daily basis. It’s one thing that they expect an answer to everything or have things done “ASAP” and show little to no appreciation to good work, but totally another that many of the bankers seem to think it’s completely fine to act jerkish /unnecessarily mean or just outright personally attack us lawyers. Just wondering what’s other folks’ experience been like. Do your partners also ask you to bite your tongue and just put up with them?

there are dicks everywhere, and quite a few bankers are dicks. For the most part, they're just in a hurry, which can come off mean. But personal attacks do come, and you're gonna have to take it. You're being paid too much money to care.

Note: when I worked in finance I once told the associate I was working with he wasn't allowed to go to the bathroom, because the documents were expected any minute and had to be turned around right away. I've also once called the attorney literally every 5 minutes asking if he was finished. We weren't paying $$$ for an associate's excellent legal acumen, but for the associate to be at our beck and call, to be able to provide us with the requisite service at the requisite time. I never yelled, but, you bet that if he didn't deliver as required, we'd have asked his supervising partner for a different associate - and you can only imagine what that would have done for his career.
"We" had gotten people fired at other companies for insufficient/inadequate performance - including a V.P. at a bank.

I know people have already given you a lot of shit for this, but the bold is a really fucked up outlook. That outlook from clients is what makes the law such a miserable profession for so many people. Also, calling somebody literally every five minutes is a terrible way to get the work you need done.

[QContinuum]

Also, calling somebody literally every five minutes is a terrible way to get the work you need done.

I mean, it's so obviously counterproductive that it suggests to me that the work wasn't actually time-sensitive at all (or at least, not nearly as time-sensitive as FND would have us believe) - rather, it was simply a power trip that FND got some jollies out of.

If it was actually a situation where literally every minute mattered, no idiot would call every five minutes - the time spent providing those every-5-minute status updates would easily add up to at least an extra 10-12 minutes of nonproductive time every hour, not even factoring in reduced efficiency the rest of the time due to the constant interruptions. There's no way FND's dumb enough to think that his every-5-minute calls were going to help speed things up.

[Anonymous User]

V10 Rx but have done a finance rotation at a V5. I'm assuming FND-or whatever was LevFin, which is a high volume/low margin group on the bank side. People need to remember that these bankers are dealing with their own shit, namely that they're just churning through stacks of grids as they duke it out with other bulge brackets for lead-left so they can make their fees (and get their bonus). Nowadays banks have no leverage so it's just a race to the bottom. Doesn't surprise me to hear that poster's attitude, he/she probably had it worse. Things move incredibly fast in levfin and it's the most thankless group (for both bank and firm). As soon as one facility closes, on to the next stack of commitment papers with no reprieve or celebration.

If a client ever treated me (or my juniors) that way I'd just ignore the call. He/she will get it when we finish it, stop bothering us (what are they gonna do anyway, do it themselves?). Yes, they pay us a lot, but so do dozens of other clients who also require our attention. Feel free to retain a cheaper and more desperate firm if you're unhappy with our pace or work product, but there's a reason your institution has paid our rates for 100+ years. Also LOL @ bankers who act like they're paying us with their own money (it's almost always the borrower)

When something needs to be pushed back people always get on the phone and work it out (again, what are they gonna do, not close and go home?). If anything ever gets to be that tight, it's almost certainly because substantive issues weren't settled until the last minute (i.e., realm of more senior professionals), not because some junior associate didn't finish drafting an exhibit or something.

Things are much better in Rx.

[Npret]

Completely agree with the laughable idea of bankers acting like they are paying the associates salary. No one owns a professional and if your client acts like this guy describes, you should not accept it.

I’ve never had a client behave anywhere close to as this person described.

[jbagelboy]

Lol @ how hard this thread was trolled

Bravo

[DoveBodyWash]

Lol @ how hard this thread was trolled

Bravo

i guess should have known better. Real bankers don't care care about when we take bathroom breaks. Too tired or busy lurking buy-side WSO threads

[Npret]

Lol @ how hard this thread was trolled

Bravo

Yeah it’s super funny. What a genius either way - an asshole banker or an asshole troll. Must have an amazing, fulfilling life.

[nixy]

We weren't paying $$$ for an associate's excellent legal acumen, but for the associate to be at our beck and call,

I know people have already given you a lot of shit for this, but the bold is a really fucked up outlook. That outlook from clients is what makes the law such a miserable profession for so many people. Also, calling somebody literally every five minutes is a terrible way to get the work you need done.

The bolded seems like one of the least controversial things he's said, though. Of course the reason an associate (or lawyer) gets paid so much is (at least in part) to be at seniors' (or clients') beck and call. That doesn't justify forbidding bathroom breaks or calling every 5 minutes, because there are reasonable ways to treat associates and unreasonable ways, but my understanding was that availability was part of the job.

[ghostoftraynor]

We weren't paying $$$ for an associate's excellent legal acumen, but for the associate to be at our beck and call,

I know people have already given you a lot of shit for this, but the bold is a really fucked up outlook. That outlook from clients is what makes the law such a miserable profession for so many people. Also, calling somebody literally every five minutes is a terrible way to get the work you need done.

The bolded seems like one of the least controversial things he's said, though. Of course the reason an associate (or lawyer) gets paid so much is (at least in part) to be at seniors' (or clients') beck and call. That doesn't justify forbidding bathroom breaks or calling every 5 minutes, because there are reasonable ways to treat associates and unreasonable ways, but my understanding was that availability was part of the job.

I agree out of context it's not super controversial. Working late and being able to hop on the phone at any hour is a large part of why the salaries are so high. But, that's much different than how FND seems to interpret it as meaning associates signed up for mental abuse.

I would add it's largely juniors that have little legal acumen and are more just grindbots. Top clients pay top firms top dollars because those firms have partners that are at the top of the field (and have a deep bench of midlevels/seniors that have been trained well to handle the day to day).

*Starting to think FND may have been trolling us hard, but still seems worth discussing this points given people at least like FND are a large part of what makes this job so miserable for so many.

[lavarman84]

We weren't paying $$$ for an associate's excellent legal acumen, but for the associate to be at our beck and call,

I know people have already given you a lot of shit for this, but the bold is a really fucked up outlook. That outlook from clients is what makes the law such a miserable profession for so many people. Also, calling somebody literally every five minutes is a terrible way to get the work you need done.

The bolded seems like one of the least controversial things he's said, though. Of course the reason an associate (or lawyer) gets paid so much is (at least in part) to be at seniors' (or clients') beck and call. That doesn't justify forbidding bathroom breaks or calling every 5 minutes, because there are reasonable ways to treat associates and unreasonable ways, but my understanding was that availability was part of the job.

Maybe for you. I am not anybody's house pet. I am at nobody's beck and call. I am a professional. If that's the way lawyers think of themselves (and their coworkers) in biglaw, it's one more reason not to consider working there.

[mcallister]

I'm not in banking, but as a F500 client, I've never felt the need to behave remotely like what FND seems to think is necessary- even in stressful and deadline-critical M&A deals.

It's fine to let an associate know that things are at a critical stage and their immediate availability might be needed. But telling them not to attend to personal needs is way over the line. Nor is it going to be helpful to anyone to call every 5 minutes- nobody can work effectively that way.

Am also at a F500, and will second all of this.

Just to clarify, I was very nice and polite when I told counsel he couldn't go to the bathroom because the work was expected imminently.

And this made me lol. What a fun guy.

[nixy]

Good for you. I’m not saying how I think anything *should* be, just how it seems that it is. There are serious trade offs for getting paid that much, especially in a service industry. And I don’t think being a professional is inconsistent with being available to your bosses/clients. Not “you can’t go to the bathroom” or “call every 5 minutes” available, but definitely “this deal is going down in the next 2 hours [or whatever] and you have to be here and ready no matter what your plans were.” I get why lots of people hate actually experiencing that but it’s why associates get paid a lot of money - not just because they’re super smart.

(But to ghostoftraynor - I agree that doesn’t justify abusing anyone, at all. I’m not endorsing FND’s specific approach - in particular I agree that the point is to have smart well-trained associates available - just pointing out that availability comes with the paycheck.)

[abiglawyer]

Good for you. I’m not saying how I think anything *should* be, just how it seems that it is. There are serious trade offs for getting paid that much, especially in a service industry. And I don’t think being a professional is inconsistent with being available to your bosses/clients. Not “you can’t go to the bathroom” or “call every 5 minutes” available, but definitely “this deal is going down in the next 2 hours [or whatever] and you have to be here and ready no matter what your plans were.” I get why lots of people hate actually experiencing that but it’s why associates get paid a lot of money - not just because they’re super smart.

(But to ghostoftraynor - I agree that doesn’t justify abusing anyone, at all. I’m not endorsing FND’s specific approach - in particular I agree that the point is to have smart well-trained associates available - just pointing out that availability comes with the paycheck.)

I think people may be taking issue with the phrase "beck and call" and its undignified master-bondsman connotations, especially in light of the rest of what FND said. If he had just said "for the associate to be available when we need them" I doubt we'd still be talking about this. But the phrase he used is so in keeping with his general sadistic outlook that it's hard not to balk at it.

Also, I looked at his post history and he apparently does estate planning for farmers (presumably in the Midwest?) so I'm not totally convinced he's speaking from experience about the finance/biglaw stuff.

[nerd1]

Finance bro is a great reminder nobody is the bad guy in their own head. The human ability to justify horrible actions is truly amazing.

I don't know why people assume the neurotic finance person is a bro. Could be a bro or a gal. Actually, the tone reminded me perfectly of some horrible female midlevels/seniors/clients I worked with.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone comment on the banker-lawyer relationship in M&A/RX? Despite how shitty it is, it makes sense why bankers feel entitled to shit on cap markets/finance attorneys considering that they’re the clients. In M&A/RX, lawyers and bankers share the same client, so one would think this wouldn’t happen nearly as much.

Junior M&A associate here. So far I haven't seen or heard of this kind of interaction in M&A.