Contract Work - To Do or Not To Do

2008 caused an undeniable tornado in the legal community. As we enter 2009, many are still picking up the pieces and debris. There is an abundance of bright attorneys that were the victims of this tornado that are still searching for new legal homes. Unfortunately, the shake up in the legal community may prevent these attorneys from ever finding one.

The destruction of 2008 has forever had an impact on the legal community. Careers ended before they could even get off the ground. While other established careers, came to a sudden halt before the transition into partner could happen. We watched in shock as three highly respected law firms came crashing down and vaporized before our eyes.

As 2008 yielded its fury on law firms from the East to the West from the North to the South, I had to wonder whether firms would change their views on contract attorneys. The sudden layoffs flooded the gates of “contract attorney” land. Once a terrain that the legal community falsely assumed was reserved for the less intelligent attorneys who couldn’t land a prized position at one of the nations top law firms, this same territory was now seeing Top 10 law school graduates who were laid off from some of the best firms in the country moving in. With the market flooded with top attorneys, these uniquely positioned lawyers are finding themselves in a desperate position to pay the bills on the lifestyle their former large firm occupancy had afforded them. Would the same large firms that chased after and fought over these attorneys just few years ago – or even a year ago in some instances, be so forgiving when these same bright attorneys came knocking on their door once the market was better? Unfortunately, everywhere I have posed this question, I have gotten the same resounding answer. No. So what are these unlucky souls to do?

For those who have not decided to flee the legal profession all together, my advice starts with the consideration of the smaller and mid-size firms. These firms are more than happy to scoop up the talented attorneys that the AmLaw 200 firms have discarded. Under normal market conditions, these firms know that they would not be able to compete with the larger firms for this pool of talent. And maybe, the talented attorneys that join these firms will find happier conditions and the possibility of partner truly a realistic goal. Plus, with all of the mergers that take place in the legal community these days, these attorneys could find themselves back into the AmLaw 200 circle in no time.

I have also have advised those who have the stomach for it, to hang up their own shingle. Without knowing when the legal market will recover from the wrath of 2008, opening your own firm will keep your legal skills intact, if not grow them exponentially, and put some money in your pocket. And maybe, when the market does recover, the brave souls that took this route may be able to be scooped up by a large firm because of their entrepreneurial spirit. Or better yet, for the book of business they were able to develop. And for some of the truly lucky, the large firm would no longer be on the radar because they will end up doing just fine on their own.

Lastly, there are group of attorneys who are donating their genius intellects to the non-profit and public sectors. The pay check may be near non-existent compared to what they are accustomed, but they are still doing challenging quality work and getting more responsibility than they would have ever dreamt of in a large firm. Depending on the name that they make for themselves doing good deeds, the road could lead back to big firm life.

In closing, attorneys need to consider the ramifications of their decisions to do contract work. Unfair or not, there is still a stigma attached to attorneys who do contract work that the AmLaw 200 hold fast to for the most part. Forget that you graduated from Michigan and went to work for Cadwalader or White & Case upon graduation. The decision to do contract work while you search for your next gig could be the death of your AmLaw 200 career. Attorneys in this slow market need to understand that the decisions they make while between gigs should be viewed as just as important as when picking their next actual resume building gig.

Words of Wisdom From A Managing Partner

Hello! When I originally decided to return from my blogging sabatical, I didn't have anything in particular to say. I was just going to wish the legal community a happy holidays and spread some optimism for 2009. Then I came across the article below. Written by Peter Kalis who is the managing partner of K&L Gates, I think its sentiments are worthy. And during this downturn, I think the message is something all the AmLaw 200 firms should remember. Enjoy the read and I will see everyone in 2009. Happy Holidays and Happy New Year!!!

'U.S. News' list: a curse

Peter Kalis / Special to The National Law Journal December 22, 2008

As the head of a major customer of American law schools, I am concerned about the impact of U.S. News & World Report's annual law school ranking.The ranking sells magazines. It generates heat, not light. In the legal industry, we're used to this art form — a magazine develops a ranking using a questionable approach, lets loose with this year's version and then starts reporting on its own pseudo-news as if it's something to which we should pay attention. For the most part, it's not.

I have two major gripes with the U.S. News phenomenon.

First, I'd like to take up the cause of "nondesigner" law schools. I'll focus on the University of Pittsburgh School of Law but there are many "Pitt Laws" in our markets — law schools with dedicated teachers and researchers, fine student bodies and solid market reputations that, alas, do not rank them with Yale or Harvard.

The real Pitt Law was hammered this year in the U.S. News ranking and dropped 16 places, from 57 to 73. Other law schools experienced abrupt movements up and down this year's ranking as compared with last. Such sudden changes among stable institutions reveal more about the ranking than the law schools themselves. If change comes slowly to law firms, it comes even more slowly within academia. I am a graduate of Yale Law School. It was and is a great place — but it's no Pitt Law. Yale Law is the same tiny size it was 50 years ago — about 165 students per class. The 50 largest law firms in the country now employ about 65,000 lawyers. Yale Law today, sad to say, is quantitatively beside the point to most of the country's leading law firms. And, of course, "Yale Law" is merely a metaphor that embraces Harvard, Stanford, Chicago and the other "designer" law schools whose entering class sizes are frozen in time like the fetching smile of a prom date you haven't seen in 40 years.

Consider the impact of the real Pitt Law on my firm. We have 29 partners and 60 lawyers overall who are graduates of Pitt Law. It has supplied us with a global development partner, a global general counsel, a global head of litigation and the managing partner of one of our largest offices. It trains great leaders as well as great lawyers not only because ideas matter there, but also because emotional intelligence and analytical intelligence go hand in hand. It doesn't sit well with me when Pitt Law is unfairly maligned.

I understand that the presidency of the Harvard Law Review is the legal equivalent to the Heisman Trophy. But there aren't many of them, and not all of them really perform at the next level. Consider the storied National Football League career of Heisman Trophy winner Gino Torretta, who played at the Harvard of college football — the University of Miami. Such ruminations won't take you long; his lackluster career was over in a flash. Compare the still blooming career of that fabulous quarterback from the "other" Miami, Ben Roethlisberger. It's what you do between the lines that counts, and from that perspective I see little discernible difference among the top graduates of scores of law schools.

Endangering diversity

Here's my second gripe: My firm and firms across America depend on law schools to solve the diversity riddle. If they don't graduate minority lawyers, we can't hire them. I'm worried that the mindless competition created by the U.S. News ranking could lead law schools to skew their admissions processes away from admitting minority applicants.

A recent report in the New York Law Journal cited the dropping enrollment of minority law students and described the view of law school deans that efforts to scramble up the U.S. News list are partly to blame. With law schools focusing on quantifiable items as the best way to climb the charts, minority and other deserving candidates with less stellar scores may be left by the wayside.

I was such a candidate. My LSAT score was mediocre. I was a hard-working kid from West Virginia University, and Yale Law placed a bet on me. If Yale Law had been paying attention to some prehistoric version of U.S. News, I would never have made the team. I would not have been editor-in-chief of the Yale Law Journal nor law clerk to Chief Judge J. Skelly Wright of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia or Associate Justice Byron White. In the age of U.S. News, can the "Pitt Laws" afford such risk-taking?

My law firm and others like it live at the intersection of globalization and regulation. Our industry is crucial to economic development around the world, as we advise and advocate in response to cross-border movements of people, products, services and capital and to the ratchet-like intrusions of governments into the marketplace. We can't do our job without the scores of "Pitt Laws" continuing to attract, educate and acculturate thousands of talented students.

If you are a beleaguered law school dean, know that this customer pays not a damn bit of attention to the U.S. News ranking — nor should your applicant pool.

Peter Kalis is the chairman and global managing partner of K&L Gates.

To learn more about K&L Gates, visit http://www.klgates.com/.

This Is For The Law Students

For those of you currently going through the lovely (please note my sarcasm) experience of on campus recruiting, please check out The Recruitment Story. The Chair of Clearly Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton's Recruiting Committee along with two law students discuss on campus recruiting. Enjoy!

And best of luck to all of you going through OCI. Consider it a rite of passage.

How To Keep Your Day Job

Okay, I admit that many could have used this advice long before now. And I apologize. However, I only recently entered the legal recruiting industry. I finally started blogging just this month. So once again, my apologies to those that receive this piece of advice too late.

So why am I writing about keeping your day job? Well, we are in a recession. Sorry Mr. President, but I must tell it as it is. It's true, we are in a recession so attorneys need to adjust their behavior accordingly to survive this downturn. I am a believer that once you talk openly about the elephant in the room - or in this case, the ten thousand ton elephant in the room - we can move in a positive direction.

In an August 20, 2008 article, Worst Year for Big Firms Since 2001, Says Citi Expert by Dan DiPietro, Mr. DiPietro states that this year represents the worse revenue growth for big firms in seven years. In addition, the demand for legal services is the lowest it has been in seven years.

Others take the position that this downturn is more analogous to the downturn of the early nineties. Evidence indicates that the issues of the current downturn run deeper than the slow market of 2001. Experts simply see the current snowball effect as more complicated than the problems of 2001.

So what happened? Why are the big firms having such a rough time? Why are layoffs becoming a common theme? Why are first year associates being told that their start dates have been pushed back to sometime in 2009? Or worse, there will be no start date. Well, the big firms' bread and butter transactional practices had many clients in the financial sector, such as high-end private equity, real estate finance, securitization and structured finance, that are no longer able to provide the same level of business. The same client base that provided these big firms with enormous profits during the prior six years are going belly up as a result of the mortgage and credit crisis. The Bear Stearns and Countrywide Mortgage fiascoes are prime examples. Don't even get me started on the auction rate securities scandal that includes many of the world's largest banks.

Another issue is that due to the recession, associates are not leaving the firms as they have done in previous years. Associates are deciding to be thankful that they have a job and stick with it instead of trying to find a new one. As a result, the big firms have too many attorneys on staff and not enough work to go around. Plus, while revenues are down, the firms are still paying huge associate salaries to associates they had expected would have left the firm in search for greener pastures at this point.

Mr. DiPietro does point to a silver lining in his August 20 article. He states that this downturn "will enable firms to take steps that partners would resist in a good year--winnowing out unproductive lawyers and applying greater discipline to expense control." Yup, you read correctly. The silver lining includes "winnowing out unproductive lawyers." Yikes! The free ride is over my big firm attorneys.

So what can attorneys do to make sure they don't receive the pink ticket from their big firm and the lost of their large paychecks? First, they need to make themselves invaluable. When I was an associate, my fellow associates and I always joked that we were dispensable. Well, putting joking aside, associates are until they prove that they aren't. Start finding ways to make yourself indispensable. Develop your writing and communication skills. Become knowledgeable in little niche topics within your area of practice. Hard to get rid of the attorney who is the only one who understands HUD's ILSA regulations. Huh? Exactly.

Next, think of new creative ways to bring in business. Yes, I know you are just an associate, but if you can figure out some ways to bring some significant business in, then you will definitely move up on the associate favorite list. Getting your name out into the community through bar activities or publishing articles is an excellent start. Remember, law firms are a business and the bottom line matters. Place a law firm in a recession, and that bottom line is all the partners can think about. You will definitely stand out if you start looking for ways to help that bottom line.

Also, try and add qualifications to your resume. It is never too late to add new areas of practice to your resume. If you practice labor and employment law, maybe expand into immigration or ERISA. Knowledge of either area can only assist in your labor and employment practice. If you practice real estate, then maybe also expand your knowledge to finance, lending and/or bankruptcy. Always look for ways to expand your horizons.


Lastly, and most importantly, please do not panic. Remember that the legal market has been down before and has bounced back. The United States has a very resilient legal market and we will all survive this downturn. It is only a matter of how you go about ensuring your survival.

Associate Disloyalty and What It Means For Diversity Recruitment

Anyone in the legal industry who hasn’t been under a rock for the past forty-some odd years can tell you that the legal profession has changed. Attorney loyalties to one employer throughout one’s career no longer exist. Gone are the days where attorneys graduated from law school and went to work for an employer where they remained until the close of their career. Nowadays, it’s not surprising to hear of attorneys that have worked for four or five different employers during the course of their career. As a result of lateral job hopping, or the more politely coined term, lateral movement, recruiting and retention are hot topics that are on the lips of almost every legal employer. What is the other hot topic that is also on employers’ lips and goes hand in hand with recruiting and retention, but makes most of us squirm in our seats? Diversity.

These days legal employers are not only seeking stellar candidates, but they are also seeking stellar diverse candidates. As the world shrinks thanks to such technological advances as the Internet, social web networks, email and web conferencing, companies are being forced to look more like the world. Not only are companies realizing that diversifying its ranks is the moral thing to do, but they are also realizing it is logical from a business standpoint. It is becoming increasingly hard for companies to succeed on the international front if they are homogenous. Demands are being made on companies to look more like their client base. The legal community is not any different. Law firms in the United States are receiving the same demands to diversify from their clients. Corporate America is issuing ultimatums - diversify or else.

These ultimatums are not falling on deaf ears. With the rise in lateral moves, legal employers, especially law firms, are constantly debating the best method of attracting the top diverse candidates. However, attracting candidates of diverse backgrounds is only part of the equation. The second part is retaining them and ensuring their long-term success with the employer. With so many attorneys moving through jobs as though they were in revolving doors, employers are finding themselves in stiff competition for scarce top talent. So what are employers to do?

There needs to be a commitment on the part of the employers to diversify. Employers cannot take a passive approach to recruiting diverse candidates. They need to be proactive and willing to put some sweat into it. Partners and senior attorneys need to become intimately involved in the hiring process, including selling the position. Key attorneys need to be able to sell potential laterals on the advantages of the employer and what factors differentiate that employer from others. Potential laterals shall interact with attorneys of the employer that will make them feel welcomed.

A simple way to make candidates feel welcomed is to put candidates with the employers’ attorneys that have similar backgrounds. Similarities can include law school, undergraduate school, activities, personal interests, etc. Where diversity is concerned, do not discount pairing candidates with attorneys of the same diverse background. The employer should show the candidate that it has attorneys with the same background that are actively involved, successful and happy.

Emphasis cannot be solely on the recruitment process. Once a diverse attorney is hired, the employer needs to make sure the attorney is incorporated into the company culture. Employers need to create an environment where diverse attorneys know their differences are valued and mentoring systems are in place to ensure their success. Diverse attorneys shall not be left to whittle away in their offices. They should be introduced to other attorneys and staff members as well as included in the employer’s extracurricular activities, such as lunch outings and company sports teams. It is important that diverse attorneys forge personal ties as well as professional ties to the employer. This further strengthens the bonds that hold the attorneys to the employer.

In addition, employers need to reach out to the diverse community and become entrenched in it. Getting involved in and supporting diversity conferences, minority bar associations and minority outreach programs is a must. Supporting the efforts of its diverse attorneys who become involved in different diverse programs and activities should be included in the overall agenda. If the attorneys know their employer supports their interests and concerns, they will be inclined to feel more welcomed and accepted into the company culture.

Lastly, faced with associate disloyalty, employers need to be prepared to address the hard questions about its diversity initiatives and their plans to achieve those initiatives when attracting and retaining diverse attorneys. Employers are in heavy competition for top talent; even more so once diversity comes into play. Attracting diverse candidates is one thing, but the employers need to be able to retain these attorneys. If employers do not keep their diverse attorneys satisfied, there is a competitor down the street that is ready and willing to lure them away. Should the loss of diverse attorneys become a regular occurrence, this could spell problems for an employer who has received a diversity ultimatum.

Recession Job Searches

There is an Allstate commercial that starts with Dennis Haysbert, who starred as President David Palmer on the critically acclaimed “24” and now heads up the cast of “The Unit”, saying “we may not be in a recession, but it sure feels like one.” Well, I would like to rephrase that quote to say, “we may not be in a recession, but the legal market is responding as though we are, and thus we must act accordingly.”

In the hallways of the top law firms, in the bar study courses across the country and in the class rooms of the law schools, whispers filled with fear are growing louder as discussions about the current legal job market – or lack thereof – become more abundant. As such legal giants as Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP announce massive layoffs, attorneys debate whether the current times resemble the downturn of the nineties or 9/11.

I am sure everyone can agree that lateral movement has slowed down to a near halt. So how do legal employers find qualified candidates in the current economic climate? And more importantly, how do the attorneys who dare to make lateral moves right now find positions? The simple answer to both questions is to use a legal recruiter. For the most part, hiring a legal recruiter to help fill a vacancy or find you a position makes the search easier.

Legal employers utilize recruiters because recruiters are expected to find quality candidates quickly. Currently, law firms are being flooded with resumes of candidates that are searching for jobs due to layoffs or, in the case of the solo practitioner, due to the disappearance of business. Yet, only a few positions exist. Gone are the days where work is so plentiful that overstaffing is commonplace. Thus, employers’ resources are drained when they utilize their staff to review these piles of resumes flowing in. Add in the fact that statistics indicate that as baby boomers leave the job market and law school graduation rates remain flat, there will be a shortage of qualified attorneys. As a result, employers will be relying more heavily on recruiters to find them top talent – recession or not.

On the flip side, candidates need to utilize recruiters so that their resumes land on top of the pile. Experienced recruiters have developed relationships with different employers, and employers respect their opinions and suggestions. This allows the recruiter to get a candidate that may have fallen between the cracks before an employer for a thorough consideration. Basically, an experienced recruiter can help a candidate jump to the front of the line.

What makes recruiters so special? It is the job of a recruiter to learn the market, the players and the requirements of each position. The more a recruiter understands the market, the culture of the different employers and the details of the vacancies, the more qualified the recruiter will be to find a good match. It takes a lot of time and energy to gather this information. Time and energy that most candidates rather not spend, especially if a candidate is currently employed. Simply, why reinvent the wheel when someone already has the blueprints and the contact list?

In a downturn such as the one in right now, both sides of the coin – employers and candidates – turn to recruiters, most of whom are former practicing attorneys, because of their contacts in the industry. Often recruiters are able to find or place top candidates because they have many contacts they can call for recommendations. Most jobs are filled and deals done through the use of contacts. Recruiters tap their contacts to find out as to who may be looking or who of their contacts think would be interested. Often, it is through one of the recruiter’s contacts that an actual match is made between employer and candidate.

If a recruiter is unable to make a love connection through his or her contacts, often the recruiter turns to a database maintained by the recruiter that provides an excellent source for potential candidates. If the recruiter is thorough, this database will contain resumes of active and inactive candidates. In addition, the database shall include target candidates, which are qualified candidates in the industry that may be able be persuaded to leave their current job for the right opportunity.

Similarly, recruiters should have a database on employers and what their areas of practice. Therefore, when a top candidate’s resume is received, but no actual vacancies exist, the recruiter can contact a select group of employers who may be interested in speaking with the candidate. Even if they are not actively looking, most firms will make room for a top candidate in a practice area where there tends to be a shortage of qualified attorneys.

For difficult searches, an experienced recruiter will utilize fellow recruiters. Joining forces with recruiters from all over the country, allow the recruiter to provide a more thorough search. Both legal employers and candidates should look for a recruiter that can provide such a service, especially where a search covers multiple states or metropolitan areas. For example, one recruiter may know of a potential candidate but may not work in that industry or area of the country and thus, may refer that candidate to another recruiter more qualified to assist such candidate.

Moreover, if diversity is the name of the job search game, then legal recruiters are an excellent source for guidance. As with most legal employers, legal recruiters are setting up diversity initiatives as well. Many of the larger recruiting firms are creating diversity departments and/or diversity coordinator positions. The goal of these departments or coordinator positions is to advise employers on the hiring and retention of diverse candidates as well as provide the employers with qualified diverse candidates to choose from.

Lastly, the advantage of using a legal recruiter is the benefit of receiving a pre-screened candidate. Most recruiters conduct phone interviews to determine qualifications and interest of candidates. In addition, any creditable recruiter conducts background checks on the candidates prior to submitting a candidate’s resume to an employer. Background checks should be conducted no matter how wonderful a candidate may appear. A recruiter does not want to place someone who has lied about where he/she has worked, attended school or licenses received. A mistake like this could destroy a recruiter’s reputation and career.

On the same token, candidates should welcome these preliminary screens so that if any questionable information arises, things can be addressed and rectified prior to a potential employer receiving their resume. It is better for the recruiter to deal with any potential reasons for an employer to reject a candidate versus losing a job offer because the employer found out something negative about the candidate. In closing, both employers and candidates should utilize legal recruiters to expedite and provide efficiency to the job search and actual hiring processes. And the fact that the legal market in this country is experiencing one of its worse downturns in a long time (whether you choose to call this downturn a recession is up to you), the need to utilize legal recruiters is even greater.