Which US firms would you take over MC?

Everyone knows the arguments for US firms over MC (smaller offices, more responsibility, higher pay) but there are surely some US firms that are more popular than others?
Which US firms would people consider taking over a MC offer, and which ones would you not take over an MC offer?

Reply 1

username1177050

20

I would not take one single us firm over the magic circle (supposing I even had this option!). It is well known that the training provided by magic circle firms is the envy of us firms and whilst the training will no doubt be superb at the us firms, these firms are always on the lookout to recruit magic circle NQ's at the associate level should you want this.

Reply 2

Joris_Bohnson

Original post by neal95

It is well known that the training provided by magic circle firms is the envy of us firms

Is it? What makes you say that?

Reply 3

MrLintonJones

OP

8

Original post by neal95

I would not take one single us firm over the magic circle (supposing I even had this option!). It is well known that the training provided by magic circle firms is the envy of us firms and whilst the training will no doubt be superb at the us firms, these firms are always on the lookout to recruit magic circle NQ's at the associate level should you want this.

If this was true surely business sense would dictate that US firms just aggressively poach MC NQs for all their lawyers?

all firms need to top up intakes (or indeed let trainees go) when needs change, so I don't think that should be confused for quality of training. I'm sure there's an argument to say US firms provide better training. But this question wasnt really about that anyway!

Reply 4

Albcat28

5

Original post by neal95

I would not take one single us firm over the magic circle (supposing I even had this option!). It is well known that the training provided by magic circle firms is the envy of us firms and whilst the training will no doubt be superb at the us firms, these firms are always on the lookout to recruit magic circle NQ's at the associate level should you want this.

Totally agree with the above . I come at this from having a close relative who had to make a choice between MC /US TC . Although the salary was considerably higher at the US firm the obvious concern were the hours . quality of work and environment . They also knew a few people at both MC and US firms so were able to canvass opinion . US firms are known to be quite ruthless and with that you lose the attention paid to you as a trainee . Another thing worth doing is Googling 'Lathamed'.

Reply 5

MrLintonJones

OP

8

Original post by Albcat28

Totally agree with the above . I come at this from having a close relative who had to make a choice between MC /US TC . Although the salary was considerably higher at the US firm the obvious concern were the hours . quality of work and environment . They also knew a few people at both MC and US firms so were able to canvass opinion . US firms are known to be quite ruthless and with that you lose the attention paid to you as a trainee . Another thing worth doing is Googling 'Lathamed'.

What's your take on the hours and quality of work?

My friends at US/MC all seem to work equally long hours, and quality of work wise, US firms seem to be in the top tier in their respective specialisms. Weil for private equity, Skadden for M&A, WilmerHale for arbitration, Arnold & Porter for Pharma/Tech et cetera and trainees I would think would only go there if they were interested in those specialisms. Obviously you'll have access to a broader range of work at an MC firm, but that's because they're bigger offices (which offsets the higher responsibility, smaller environment point).

sincerely, devil's advocate :wink:

Reply 6

Albcat28

5

Original post by MrLintonJones

What's your take on the hours and quality of work?

My friends at US/MC all seem to work equally long hours, and quality of work wise, US firms seem to be in the top tier in their respective specialisms. Weil for private equity, Skadden for M&A, WilmerHale for arbitration, Arnold & Porter for Pharma/Tech et cetera and trainees I would think would only go there if they were interested in those specialisms. Obviously you'll have access to a broader range of work at an MC firm, but that's because they're bigger offices (which offsets the higher responsibility, smaller environment point).

sincerely, devil's advocate :wink:

Wish they could answer themselves ! They are really enjoying it and into their third seat of Litigation having done banking /M&A and are now looking at the possibility of an international secondment . The hours obv depend on which department you are in but if you are in the MC you expect them . Some nights they have finished at 11pm and others 6/7/8 which seems to be the norm . They've never had to work a weekend but some colleagues have worked a few . As posters have said the training and support are outstanding . They have also been given a huge amount of responsibility . Its the small things that also make it a great place to work , such as none of their requests for leave have been refused , even at the last minute .
Think that's my advert for the MC over !
I'm sure people will also have generous thing to say about US firms .
Sorry I haven't been much help on the business side of things

Reply 7

MrLintonJones

OP

8

Original post by J-SP

1) They do aggressively poach NQ talent. Not just MC firms but also SC firms too. A lot of SC NQs jump ship to US firms.

2) It is much rarer for MC/SC firms to top up their recruitment at NQ level. It does happen, but given their intake numbers, tends to be much lower/less frequent.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I know they poach NQ talent, I was just making the point that they would possibly do that for all their NQ positions if they believed MC trained lawyers would be more beneficial for them. Then I suppose employ cheaper paralegals for trainee tasks?

Reply 8

MrLintonJones

OP

8

What about a US firm that pays circa 85-90k, rather than the recent 120k+, would you still be inclined to go there?

Reply 9

Albcat28

5

Picking up on your point about MC firms seeming more attractive if you are just out of university and can't tie your shoelaces , inferring that anyone who can't take the pressure / competitiveness would not choose the US firm . As I said , my relative had a choice of both and was a career changer having spent a good few years in another very competitive industry . Quite a few of their cohort were career changers , luckily they were able to choose what appears to be for them the correct firm .

Reply 10

O'Doyle Rules

4

I've always wondered at the statement "once qualified at a MC shop, you can just jump ship to a US firm".

Is it really that 'easy' to make the move? I would imagine you would have to be a star junior to make such a move?

Which US firms would you take over MC?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you