Summer Associates Advised to Lose the Sense of Entitlement

B. McLeod
Apr 28, 2009 6:29 AM CST

It is truly difficult to imagine a “summer associate” having a “sense of entitlement” right now.  The ones focusing on lunch may actually know what they are doing.  At least they may manage to wind up with a few bowls of beans out of the deal (if “associates” can afford to treat them).

Flag this comment

fed up
Apr 28, 2009 11:00 AM CST

Yes Bryson, thank you.  Put another way, it’s not what you know, it’s who you…

Flag this comment

momesq
Apr 29, 2009 1:40 PM CST

I have to disagree with the notion that it’s the social overtures that count for getting offers, not the work. Sure, unless the work product is absolutely stellar, you’re not doing yourself favors as a candidate by hiding in your office all day, and summer associates should attend a good number of “mandatory fun” social activities so that the decisionmakers can see that the candidate is going to be a good colleague and fit well with the firm’s culture. But I’ve been around enough summer associate programs to know there is a breed of summer associate who is obviously just there to party and get taken out to lunch, and secondarily to play at being a lawyer, and it’s those summer associates who should start to be a little circumspect about how they want to present themselves.

Flag this comment

A. Cerra
May 1, 2009 6:30 AM CST

Wow, this article and comment forum provide a real eye-opening experience for me.  I have only worked for non-profits, and I have never been in a situation where there would be lunches to troll for if I were so inclined to troll for them.  These notes confirm what I suspected to be true: working at a big firm does not mean you will receive the best legal training.  While your comrades in the public interest world are writing motions and memoranda, interviewing clients, and making court appearances, the alleged “best and brightest” are looking for handouts.  That’s not shocking.  What is shocking is that some of my comrades in this forum think that is not only appropriate, but the right thing to do.  I’ll stick to working hard, serving my clients, and bag lunches.  In any economy, that is what dedicated and hardworking associates should do.  Firm employers: maybe you will have to change the way you ascertain the “best and the brightest.”  You might get a better team of associates by looking for diligent workers rather than GPA giants.

Flag this comment

B Jackson
May 1, 2009 7:11 AM CST

Get off the high horse A. Cerra.  I have worked non-profit and there are plenty of slackers and freeloaders there also.  All work environments have the same types of people and the same office politics.

Flag this comment

Biglaw Associate
May 1, 2009 7:18 AM CST

It’s important not to take this out of context.  For example, at my firm, summer associates (and even first year associates) are encouraged to ask associates and partners out to lunch in order to get to know people.  The firm then picks up the tab.  It isn’t about handouts, it’s more like a sustained interview process.  And as for A. Cerra . . . I have a lot of respect for those who do work for non-profits and the public sector.  However, I think you’re out of line generalizing about biglaw associates from this article.  If you think that associates—and even summer associates—at big firms are not dedicated or diligent workers, then you are kidding yourself.  Becoming a “GPA giant” doesn’t happen by itself, you know.  And I wonder, if you’re such a super-worker, why you didn’t choose a legal job that paid more?  Was it because you couldn’t get the grades, or couldn’t get in to the right law school?  Maybe it was because you believe (admirably so) that the work you do is more important than making money.  Of course, that wouldn’t explain your apparent bitterness at those who have biglaw jobs (for now). . .

Flag this comment

Aerin
May 1, 2009 7:33 AM CST

I quote:

“These notes confirm what I suspected to be true: working at a big firm does not mean you will receive the best legal training.”

There is (or at least has been the last 12 years) a *HUGE* difference between being a summer associate at a firm and “working” at a firm, so much so that talk of the bait-and-switch is rampant in the junior associates classes.

To the extent that Cerra is comparing working in public interest as a law student versus working in a big firm as a law student, well, I don’t care how much “work” you’ve done.  When you graduate, you don’t know a thing. 

What Cerra’s essentially boasting about is that his or her opponents in the Tour de France got off their training wheels at 6 years old, but she got off his or her training wheels at 5.  Actually, a better analogy might be the college students who are arguing over who took more college classes when they were in high school.

Now, if you want to criticize us for false advertising, go ahead.  The bait-and-switch isn’t necessarily the most up-front way of operating, I’ll grant.  But we do have reasons for it, which will be explained below.  I quote again:

“Firm employers: maybe you will have to change the way you ascertain the “best and the brightest.”  You might get a better team of associates by looking for diligent workers rather than GPA giants.”

We know exactly what we’re doing.  Public Interest organizations already get a good supply of the cream of each law school class, because law students are generally young and want to save the world.  Our job in recruiting is to identify those among the high-achievers who are also going to be susceptible to the call to work like a dog in exchange for vast compensation.  The kind of student we want is the studenwho *likes* having a round of golf at a prestigious country club, who *likes* going out on a yacht for gourmet hors d’ouevres and expensive California Cabernet. 

By targetting summer programs towards lifestyle, we are able to pick out the students who are going to devote 5/6 of their waking life to billable projects—that’s a LOT of time and that translates into a LOT of experience writing motions and memoranda and making court appearances; they will likely have spent far more actual time practicing law than their public interest counterparts. 

Now let us be honest: junior associates usually don’t interview clients, because most big firm clients don’t get “interviewed”.  Junior Associates do, however, prep for, attend, and often even conduct depositions and they also work with opposing counsel, so to the extent that we’re worried about an attorney’s ability to develop basic social skills, the big firms have that covered as well.

Big firms get plenty of “diligent workers”, but in the world of minders, finders, and grinders, the grinders are, to put it bluntly, expendable.

I rather suspect that the same is true of public interest practice, after a fashion.

Flag this comment

Dolly Garlo, RN, JD, PCC - CreatingLegacy.com
May 1, 2009 7:43 AM CST

Thanks for the article and to all who commented.  Wouldn’t it be nice if we could somehow shift the “legal culture” in general - not just in BigLaw, but overall - back to concepts of service rather than “self-servingness”? For anyone to have a sense of entitlement, there have to be people – which in this case includes a system and culture—that enables them.  We as lawyers don’t like the attitude, and the public we have the privilege to serve certainly doesn’t like it either.  The real question is how to get to the systemic root of it and do something to change it.
I do not begrudge anyone a generous income for adding true value to the world (as opposed to just being a super-worker, working hard, being a slave to work with no real life ... however you want to phrase it).  Having run a law firm, I know how hard it is and how costly it is – financially, emotionally and physically.  And many of our colleagues go into financial debt just getting through law school and need to repay that before they can even create real income, savings and financial investments (after all, isn’t just what you make, it’s how you spend, what you keep and your return on investment that really counts).

But doing anything just for the money - or focused primarily on the money, fame, prestige, attention, perks, etc. doesn’t embody or reinforce concepts of service, and ultimately isn’t all that satisfying.  And it speaks more of a form of ultimately self-defeating, self-sabotaging self-interest, self-aggrandizement and greed.  Just ask Bernie Madoff.
Isn’t service a hallmark of professionalism?  Wouldn’t it be nice if our discussions - as lawyers and in the culture of our profession overall—centered more on that? As lawyers, as law students, as summer associates and all other legal professionals?  What if each of us maintained that focus?

Flag this comment

M. Williams
May 1, 2009 7:52 AM CST

I also concur with A. Cerra.  Recently I have been engaging in conversations with my colleagues over what I call “The Myth of the Horatio Alger Theory,” and many of the comments on this forum corroborate my position.  Hard work and dedication, although commendable, do not always lead to the promise of fame and fortune.  One’s “status,” appearance, or connections play a much more significant role in achieving success than most people are willing to admit.  It remains to be seen what effect the current state of the economy will have on future job prospects.  In other words, which job seeker will win out in the long run:  Hardworking Harriet or Trolling Tracy?  The future of our profession depends on this outcome.

Flag this comment

B. McLeod
May 1, 2009 8:28 AM CST

I have often seen truly awful work from large firms.  Earlier this year, I had to take some documents to a closing on a refinancing and transfer of a multifamily housing project.  I follow a boots-on-the-ground approach to transactional deadlines, and so personally drove those executed documents to the title company designated by seller’s (BigLaw) counsel.  Unfortunately, that office had closed sometime previously, so, by cell contact with my office, I had to track down the location of the successor title company, several miles removed.  When I spoke with the closing agent, it developed that the seller’s final closing documents were not present.  Checking, we learned sellers (BigLaw) counsel had expressed them addressed to the closed office.  As you can imagine with financing and real estate being what it is currently, the seller was the party that cared most whether the closing was done within deadlines.

Flag this comment

Steve in Philly
May 1, 2009 9:54 AM CST

B. McLeod wrote:
“The ones focusing on lunch may actually know what they are doing.  At least they may manage to wind up with a few bowls of beans out of the deal (if “associates” can afford to treat them).”

B., maybe you weren’t a BigLaw summer associate—the associates aren’t actually _paying_ for it.  They’re putting those lunches on their credit cards but are getting reimbursed (and getting the airline miles too).  Having been an SA at three (count ‘em, three—and in different cities!) BigLaw firms and having settled in at the last of them, I can let you know that the payment was often accompanied by a comment from the associate along the lines of, “Don’t thank me.  Thank Uncle [Insert first name of managing partner here].”

But that is just an aside.  Here’s my real point: a “down the middle” approach is best for summer associates, whether in a good economy or a terrible one.  Think of a continuum with “wild partier” on the one end and “nose to the grindstone” on the other.  You don’t want to be the one to the furthest left or furthest right on that continuum.  At least in BigLaw, that is.  Maybe in a small firm, you want to be the hardest worker, but not in BigLaw.  BigLaw partners and associates are looking for people they (a) won’t mind being stuck with in the office at 2 a.m., and also (b) will trust leaving in the office to get the work done at 2 a.m. so a quality job will be waiting for them when they get back in in the morning.  If you’re unsocial as an SA, you’ll fail test (a), or at least you won’t enamor yourself of anyone.  If you’re too much of a partier, you will leave a question mark as to whether you can get the work done, or at least can inspire confidence, and you’ll fail test (b).  You need to do both—get your work done well (quality, _not_ quantity, is the key as a summer; leave behind you a light-to-moderate trail of entirely excellent work), but also pop your head into as many associate offices as you can, and socialize at events with as many partners and associates as you can, to get your name and face known.  And don’t be arrogant, pompous, or fake—you’ll be easily spotted and associates and partners will talk about you.  Be a regular, and nice, person.  One of my summer jobs was at a top 5 firm (not where I ended up going though), and I could understand the comment about a little bit of arrogance being useful, although I’d say quiet confidence in oneself and one’s place in life is a better approach.  Remember, the partner you’re talking to may be at one of the top firms in the country, but he may have gone to a middle tier school and fought against that background to claw his way to the top.  Your bragging about being at a top 5 school will make you look like a jerk; your quiet confidence in why you belong at his or her firm, however, will not reflect badly and will, IMHO, be recognized.

Two quick stories to illustrate the continuum:

(1) I was a 3x SA in a boom economy, so I never actually saw someone being rejected for being too nose-to-the-grindstone (too weird, yes—I saw several of those; too arrogant, as well; and too wild a partier, also yes).  But as an associate on my firm’s summer associate committee,  I did interview (and reject) someone once who we took out for cocktails after work but who never loosened up.  I didn’t care that he didn’t drink alcohol—that was fine.  It’s that while were sitting at the Four Seasons at 5:30, the other associate and I each wanted to sit and talk casually to him.  We ordered drinks and appetizers, and we wanted to see what he was like; could we see ourselves working with him at 2 a.m.?  But he kept turning the conversation back to work and his classes, he drank a glass of water, and he didn’t eat any appetizers.  Besides that, he couldn’t or wouldn’t carry on a conversation.  Don’t be that guy.

(2) Another SA in one of my three summer classes sent out an email to the “All Summer Associates” email address, which, unwisely unknown to him, included the summer program committee of partners and associates, saying something to the effect of, “Hey guys, I’ve been trying to get to all of the ALL CAPS restaurants in Zagat’s and am only a few away from getting it done.  In case you don’t know, there are a lot of associates who are ready and willing to take us out to lunch or dinner at these places.  Don’t let this opportunity go by untapped.”  From what I heard, he had a talking to by the partner heading the summer program and then didn’t get an offer.  Don’t be that guy either.

Flag this comment

Justin
May 1, 2009 11:20 AM CST

To#18,

You couldn’t be more wrong.  Big law generally cranks out the MOST paperwork, but it’s usually far from the best.  How would I know.  We’ll I’m the clerk who reads your junk, rules on your precious motions, and largely determines whether you win or lose. 

I also don’t believe that its somehow big law’s untested 1st years that cause the problem.  I’ve seen plenty of young lawyers on their own or working in small / midsize firms handling their own cases who are competent, dilligent, and produce excellent work.  Legal aid attorneys, provided they have the time to put in on a matter are often the best. 

Big law’s just one of many career paths for a lawyer, but to say it’s the best training is hogwash.

Flag this comment

donald
May 1, 2009 12:02 PM CST

I was once in big law, and before that a summer associate in big law.  The lunches were fantastic.  I actuallly got tired of going out to lunch because I knew I’d be stuffed and sleepy after a two hour smorgasbord.  Ah, those were the days.  There are no free lunches anymore.  I do think that SA’s need to be more mindful of the current economic climate and how it is impacting the firms where they will be working.  It’s affecting everyone, both inside and outside of the big firms. 

As for training, I don’t think any one group can claim superiority.  I remember when I was at big law a partner telling me about how he learned to do things on his own when he first came to the firm (that was 30 years ago when a person could make partner in 4 years, which he did).  He succeeded over the long term by failing a number of times.  He acknowledged that new associates in big law no longer get that opportunity.  The expectations (and the salaries are too high).  Don’t ask what the point is, because the only one I had was the first sentence of this paragraph. 

I still dream about petite filet mignon for lunch.  Mmm….steak.

Flag this comment

B. McLeod
May 1, 2009 12:34 PM CST

A well-seasoned and properly prepared bowl of beans has much to be said for it as well.  Also, in addition to being high in protein and fiber, and very affordable, beans store very well for long periods, without need for refrigeration.  And, as Mel Brooks brought to our attention, “Mongo like beans.”

Flag this comment

fu
May 1, 2009 12:44 PM CST

people who went to 4th tier schools and got overlooked because of our their schools never had the luxury to feel entitled. we were too busy trying to get a job.

Flag this comment

lex
May 1, 2009 12:55 PM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

L.N. Barshevsky.
May 1, 2009 1:22 PM CST

Post of the week at #32, Mr. McLeod. 

Now I’m going to take some associates out to lunch!

Flag this comment

unperson
May 1, 2009 1:35 PM CST

and the pseudojournalists who collaborate with the law school industry scams need to be criminally prosecutred for their complicity in the TTT law school scam.

Flag this comment

Former BigLaw Boy
May 1, 2009 2:16 PM CST

The rule of thumb that I had and expected while at BigLaw was one written work product per week, which meant at least 10 writings for the summer.  And I think I put in 50-hour weeks, on average, not including the dinners, fine restaurants, baseball games, horseback riding trips, beach parties, rock concerts, amusement park outings, boating excursions, barbecues, and lunches—boy those were the days!!!  But my stint at a Chicago-based firm paled in comparison to my buddy at Skadden, which flew all of the SAs nationwide to NYC for a weekend binge…

Flag this comment

Doug
May 1, 2009 4:18 PM CST

#34 and others; and then your major client decides to take all of its work in house, the firm then lays you off in this terrible economy, and you lose your house etc.

Flag this comment

B. McLeod
May 1, 2009 7:29 PM CST

Possibly, Doug (@39).  But not if your house is paid for.  And, if you approached the world like D. Charles (@34), it would be paid for.  The car too.  Because you would have selected a modest, but solid and functional old home (maybe one of those old, 1920s bungalow houses framed in hardwood), and perhaps a Honda Civic for transportation.  Come the layoffs, you would be the one with beans in the pantry and money saved in the bank, and you would find occasional work to keep some cashflow going until the economy improves.  Right on, D. Charles.  One of the best quality posts today (and I believe the description of large firm life is also quite accurate).

Flag this comment

RFP
May 2, 2009 6:33 AM CST

I taught English composition classes (1101, 1102, and technical writing) at the University of Florida for two years, and the sense of entitlement is endemic to all students; in no way is it exclusive to law school students in particular or even to exceptional students in general. These young people [think that they] live in a different academic and professional economy than the rest of us do; having been told their entire lives that a good education is their right, they believe that they are absolved of all responsibility to earn that right, let alone the highest rewards that come with talent and effort.

To correct this, I once brought in a set of statistics to my technical writing for engineers course. These numbers showed how many engineers were graduating from UF that year (undergrad and graduate), how many from Florida universities in general, and how many from across the United States. I also had numbers reflecting how many experienced engineers were on the job market at any given moment, competing for the same jobs these student would be applying to. This was about a third of the way into the semester, when we were discussing job application documents and internships, and around the time when the sense of entitlement in the classroom was beginning to over-ripen. After my display, the sense of entitlement dried up and the quality of work I received improved markedly.

Any intern – in any field – who expects (or worse, asks) for lunch is out of his or her mind. As an composition instructor I see this as an issue of tact and rhetoric. For the love of god, don’t ask someone for a free lunch: ask them if they might have a spare moment at some point during the day to discuss a case, procedure, or aspect of the industry, to share their experiences, thoughts, and advice, or to pick their brain about something relevant. Chances are that lunch will be part of the package, since everyone (most of you lawyers especially, which is why I like you folks) love talking about themselves, their accomplishments, and their opinions of their industry.

Even better: skip on the binge drinking and partying for a few nights to save up the money to treat the other person to lunch. I have made my strongest allies by cooking dinner for them. Nothing wins over a professor or supervisor like a custom-tailored, home cooked meal. I simply can’t imagine ever asking someone in a professional setting to buy me lunch.

Flag this comment