‘Will training at a mid-tier outfit stop me from realising my US law firm dream?’
Final year student needs advice
In the latest instalment in our Career Conundrums series, one student questions whether it will be possible to make the jump from a mid-tier law firm to a US or Magic Circle outfit upon qualification.
“Hi there,
I’m a third-year law student, and have received a vac scheme at a Mid-Tier City Firm (London) which will hopefully lead to a training contract. This firm has a small international presence, but is highly regarded for its training and culture. The pay and reputation of the work isn’t the best.
I have a keen interest in Corporate M&A, and was wondering how easy it would be to move from a Mid-Tier post-qualification to a SC/MC/US Firm.
I know that when moving, firms like to see that you have exposure to high-value deals/work and have the relevant skills — this firm often works on M&A deals from £50-200M. However, I have seen that those who have trained in regional shops/similar firms have moved to places like Kirkland & Ellis and Weil. I’m worried that training at this type of firm will hinder my chances of future progression.
Any advice is greatly appreciated, thanks!”
If you have a career conundrum, email us at team@legalcheek.com.
42 Comments
GC
I mean this in the nicest way possible, but I’m maybe focus on getting a TC first
Anon
To be fair to the original poster, they have a vacation scheme, so it’s not unreasonable to be thinking ahead about whether they would want to accept a position there afterwards.
There is often a lot of pressure from firms to make quick decisions.
L
Totally possible but obviously rests on market timing. When the legal job market was super tight (2022), these sorts of moves were ubiquitous.
V
How mid tier we talking and what are it’s practice areas. And to echo the above, focus on getting the TC first. Beggars can’t be choosers. You might even find yourself more aligned to this type of firm. Sometimes I feel this students just see the glossiness of these big firms but equally if you wanna move up, will have to be strategic in types of seats. But yeah, should really be focusing on getting the TC first.
Also, maybe you should have applied to these types of firms in the first place??
Jim
I know plenty that have moved from very, very average firms to K&E/L&W etc. in finance/corporate teams. It’s not hard (though will surely be harder now that the job market has softened).
Name
Yes, you can move from mid-tier city firms to US firms. People even move from regional/national firms. Don’t worry too much about your post-qualification career at this point. You might sit in Corporate and end up hating it. Focus on getting the TC and your performance/seat selections there.
Ex Gibson Dunn
It’s concerning you dream about working at a MC etc. Please get a life! What’s the fascination? Money? You will probably be much happier at a mid tier international firm where you are not expected to work 24/7 365 days. GDC was pretty crap in the training department, useless no real structure to training. Having then been at a good British international firm since, I have found I developed a lot faster here then any of my mc/training firm and get shafted less too.
Unnamed US law firm
Echo these sentiments, particularly re training. When they say ‘on-the-job’ training , they mean no training.
Wage slave
🅱️aul 🅱️astings?
MC Insider
To say training at the MC is inadequate is complete nonsense. US firms fair enough, it’s poor, but MC offers the best training no doubt.
Ex Gibson Dunn
ok darling. This is just my view after working at LL for a short term contract before my TC. It was bonkers what I saw, including the M&M drop offs!
Trainee
You probably still have time to apply for direct TCs at higher-ranked firms this summer if you want to. You’d most likely be having interviews around the same time that vac scheme TC offers are coming out. So doable.
If you do train at the mid-tier firm you mentioned, it will probably be easier to move up the ranks in a mainstream practice like corporate at the junior end. However, the longer you leave it after qualifying the more unlikely that will be tbh.
5q
You’ll probably be able to if the market’s in a decent shape, but after a couple of years training you might have noticed the 3am emails from the sort of firms you’re talking about and reach the conclusion that you’d rather not be the person sending them.
Ex Covington
I get this from Ashurst and L&Ws all the time. Whilst they are chasing for updates, I am in the garden having quality time with family. Even the partners at my firm are like [NAME] we do not expect you to be picking your e-mails up let alone emailing them back! I am at a mid tier international firm. Yes I get paid less, but after some time in US firms at the beginning of my career I genuinely would not have it anyway now.
Legal Recruiter
As a recruiter that has been working in the market for over half a decade and seen a real variety of hiring markets, it is highly subjective.
There are plenty of exceptional lawyers that choose to work at a “mid-tier” law firm at the beginning of their careers. The reality is that US Law firms may pay the most but they do not offer the best quality training/exposure to work across all Practice areas. There are plenty of UK law firms that can offer top-tier work in various Practice areas that US counterparts cannot match.
Provided one has exceptional academics, can provide a number of tangible examples of exceptional involvement in deals/cases and want to work hard, US law firms will always entertain a conversation with those candidates.
jim
Over half a decade is an interesting way of over egging five years. Five years really ain’t a very long time mate.
Anonymous
Lol I thought that too. But if anyone is gonna be an expert in over egging it’ll be a recruiter who receives thousands of applications that do just that
Blimey
This obsession with US firms…
Trump
They pay well. Absurdly so, in some cases. So why not?
V
I guarantee you’re only looking at the money which is why you’re so fixated at US firms. You do know depending on the mid tier, you’re earning 6 figures and above without working those constant unsociable hours right?
Sigh
This is a Daily Mail clickbait title to wind people up. We all know K&E associates tend to last 1-3 years (upper end being v toppy) and operative word being “tend to”, and that it’s a job security sacrifice for short-term pay. That 1-3 years being in the context of a 30 year career. And that between 0-2 PQE about 15% leave law altogether, go in-house or go offshore, and then between 3-5 PQE about 50% of the remainder go in-house or offshore. And then from 6-8 PQE 80% of that remainder go in-house or move to a smaller firm as partner. Value of K&E being if coming in either as a lateral salaried partner or as a 5 PQE with a year and a bit to serve before getting partner title. Otherwise you’re just an overpaid minion doing 2400 hours and if you’re quiet they’ll sack you without blinking. Most US firms are also like this but K&E tells you it’ll f you coming in and doesn’t wear any trousers to work, and you can see it coming.
Also I’ve met some uni / post uni kids – and they are like this. They just want a job. And they want some cash. And they literally have no idea what anything at all is about. Even though this website exists. Rollonfriday exists. Chambers student exists. They can read the accounts. And when I tell them, not even trying to deter them from going in but to assist with finding a good fit for them long term, they’ll poo poo it, and even argue with me. This is why I don’t do pro bono stuff for people trying to get into law unless the person contacts me directly and definitively isn’t a dick.
Recent Grad
I mean I wouldn’t mind being told where I fit in well.
US Associate
Why are you so bothered with me being overpaid? Why are you so bitter about my choice to work hard for more money?
MC incoming trainee
Pinch of salt cause my experience so far has been a few vac schemes and recruitment events. What I gathered is that US take laterals from MC and MC like their NQs to be trained in-house. If you’re sent on working top tier, I would say you need to reapply and start your career at the top. That being said idk what I would do in your position — difficult to be in the pre-TC offer limbo. Send some summer TC applications so you get interviewed before/after/around your vac scheme and can see the offers at the same time. Good luck!
steve
This is just wrong.
Go through the LinkedIn profiles of a dozen K&E/L&W etc. associates, loads of them started at smaller/regional firms.
Fair enough
But how many PER regional firm who apply make it to top US every NQ cycle? There are a lot of regional firms. How likely is it? How strong a case for yourself do you need to make from a mid market firm to have Latham want to have a chat with you?
Still me
Set*
US 3PQE
There are very few opportunities to move “up the ladder” from a corporate team in a mid tier UK firm to that of a Silver Circle or Magic Circle firm. Because SC/MC firms take on so many trainees each intake, there is rarely a need to hire laterals into a department like corporate which is always a popular qualification choice. If the corporate market is doing exceptionally well and they do need to recruit laterally, there will always be a pool of people jumping ship from other MC/SC firms to recruit from.
For the same reason, it is more likely an opportunity will arise to move laterally to a corporate team within a US firm. Those firms often take on fewer trainees each intake (some don’t have any trainees), and, at risk of generalising, corporate/M&A/PE tend to be some of the largest departments in US firms. From my experience, US firms are willing to recruit strong candidates from the likes of NRF, SPB, CMS, OC etc if the market is right for it.
All of that being said, the only real reason to choose to work at a US firm rather than MC/SC is, usually, money. The training and work life balance is definitely better at MC/SC firms, and with the exception of funds/PE, the work satisfaction is probably better at MC. US firms tend to be a lot more “sink or swim” and there are fewer places to hide.
In short, if you’re happy to slog it out for a few years and earn a sh t load of money while you do so, there is a reasonable prospect of getting a job at a US firm if you’re good enough. However, I would say the likelihood of moving laterally to a SC/MC firm is pretty slim.
US 3PQE
There are very few opportunities to move “up the ladder” from a corporate team in a mid tier UK firm to that of a Silver Circle or Magic Circle firm. Because SC/MC firms take on so many trainees each intake, there is rarely a need to hire laterals into a department like corporate which is always a popular qualification choice. If the corporate market is doing exceptionally well and they do need to recruit laterally, there will always be a pool of people jumping ship from other MC/SC firms to recruit from.
For the same reason, it is more likely an opportunity will arise to move laterally to a corporate team within a US firm. Those firms often take on fewer trainees each intake (some don’t have any trainees), and, at risk of generalising, corporate/M&A/PE tend to be some of the largest departments in US firms. From my experience, US firms are willing to recruit strong candidates from the likes of NRF, SPB, CMS, OC etc if the market is right for it.
All of that being said, the only real reason to choose to work at a US firm rather than MC/SC is, usually, money. The training and work life balance is definitely better at MC/SC firms, and with the exception of funds/PE, the work satisfaction is probably better at MC. US firms tend to be a lot more “sink or swim” and there are fewer places to hide.
In short, if you’re happy to slog it out for a few years and earn a sh t load of money while you do so, there is a reasonable prospect of getting a job at a US firm if you’re good enough. However, I would say the likelihood of moving laterally to a SC/MC firm is pretty slim.
Good luck with the vac scheme.
Ex Gibson Dunn
I based this on my my three months of being a paralegal at LL banking dept. where we (paralegals helped trainees do the mundane tasks like labelling as it was never ending). Not sure about the other MC firms! My experience comprised getting the font right, naming the client correctly ie Plc PLC etc. and the correct way to insert the label paper in and sticking it on the bloody CD bible. Great exp! Big thumbs up. I hope you’re are happy with yours though.
Kiss
Anon
Oh stop. I am 30 years in. US firms screw you over. Don’t even think about going there.
fresher
How so?
Aaaa
Can speak from experience. US firms are always keen to hire motivated NQs as long as you trained in a reasonably strong team. They Key is to show that:
– you have a strong grasp of your practice area (for an NQ);
– can talk coherently about the work you did during your TC in an interview; and
– (perhaps most importantly) show that you understand what you’re getting yourself into (hours, WLB, expectations) and are accepting of these downsides.
Donny
I mean, the big question is hinder your chances comparative to what? It will be much harder to transition to a big US firm from the firm you have described than if you had MC experience, for example. This is largely down to the kind of work and experience you will get at each place.
If you are really worried about getting into a US firm, and don’t want to be hindered, just try and get a TC there, or somewhere comparable. If you can’t manage, then best of luck climbing.
“Shops”
Please can we stop calling law firms shops?
In the Shops
No.
Anon
and “Outfits”
anon
I know people who have gone from small Scottish only firms to US outfits, so a move from a mid-tier London firm is definitely doable. Just depends on the market.
Anon
The caveat to this is that the Scottish elite are easily as good as the London elite – cf. Dickson Minto merging with Milbank.
Al
Well look at MMS merging into Dentons…
anon
Nothing will stop anyone from moving mid-tier to a US if that is what they want. I went MC Corporate to US Corporate and then large International to become a partner. I enjoyed my training at the MC firm; the trainee group was great, I had plenty of ‘hands on experience’ doing real deals (not font checks). I had an outstanding supervisor. I then moved to a US firm. I loved the autonomy of a US firm, but it was very demanding, ruined much of my non-legal life, and the prospects of partnership were challenging. I benefitted from top-line MC training. There were -plenty- of mid-tier trained lawyers, as someone has to fill the gaps as people come and go at MC and US firms – up or out is real. After five years, as a 30-something dad, it made sense to go to an international firm (think HogLove, HSF, NRF, DLA). I became an equity partner (rare at a US firm); the billing pressure was sustainable; my spouse has been able to keep her legal career at another firm and I attend most of my kids’ activities with a bit of planning. The life angle can be important because, in my experience, many US partners are divorced, rely on nannies, have second or third wives/husbands, blended families and/or a spouse that doesn’t work; I didn’t want those outcomes. I earn a six figure salary of half a million plus – that is absolutely not K&E money but I have my own practice, clients. I also have a vote in partners’ meeting – that doesn’t happen in US firms which are dictatorships of the most senior equity partners. I think the deal is a good one for me
-now- but it depends on what you want and when. My decisions as a 23 year old are entirely different 15 years later. My advice is think of your career about where you want to end up and what it will take to get there and forget about the BS about US firms ‘mo money’, MC ‘lotsa prestige’ etc.
Come on…..
‘My wife has -been able to- keep her job as a lawyer’ heavily implies that if either one of you had had to leave their career to take care of the kids that you both decided to have together, it was assumed it would have been her. Poor phrasing at best and blatant sexism at worst.