Incoming Law Firm Associates Unsure When Their Jobs Will Start
A new survey by the National Association for Law Placement found that half of law firms have yet to set start dates for their new associate classes, in part due to uncertainty over when the bar exam will be given.
July 15, 2020 at 05:00 PM
3 minute read
Many law firm offices still don't know when they will be bringing on their new class of associates.
Half of law firm offices don't have an official start date for their incoming associates, according to a new survey by the National Association for Law Placement (NALP). And among the offices that have set start dates, 62% won't welcome their new lawyers until January 2021. That means hundreds of recent law graduates are in the dark about when their jobs will begin, and whether they should move for their new jobs.
"There's a lot of uncertainty right now," said NALP Executive Director James Leipold. "The bar exam is a moving target—even jurisdictions that have made decisions [about when to administer the exam] have had to make second and third decisions as the virus surges. So law firms are trying to plan start dates around when they can get licensed lawyers."
New associates typically start in August or September, after sitting for the July bar exam. But a growing number of jurisdictions have moved the test into September and October this year. Some law firms are staggering new associate start dates depending on when each associate is scheduled to take the bar, among other factors, Leipold said.
NALP surveyed more than 350 law firm offices and 167 law school career services offices in the second half of June on everything from associate start dates and summer associate programs to rescinded job offers and pay cuts during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Nearly half of career services offices—49%—reported that at least one graduate had seen their job offer rescinded. But rescinded offers have to this point been rare and concentrated at smaller firms, Leipold said. He said very few large firms have rescinded offers for incoming associates, in part because those firms faced significant shortages of midlevel associate talent for five years or so after gutting new associate classes during the 2008 recession, he noted. Instead, many firms are taking a wait-and-see approach to when new associates come on board.
"The other piece of the puzzle is the uncertainly about the volume of work, and wanting current associates to have the work now," Leipold said. "It seems that most firms that have deferred start dates have provided some sort of stipend—not a salary obviously—but some monetary compensation to help tide incoming associates over until January."
More precisely, 69% of the law firm offices that have deferred their incoming associate start dates are offering stipends or other cash payments, according to the survey.
On the law school side, 13% of career services offices reported that their schools had increased the amount of post-graduate fellowship funding available for the class of 2020 from the previous year, while 69% said that funding remained flat. Those fellowships give recent graduates the opportunity to take temporary legal jobs while getting paid by the school.
Nearly half of law school respondents—49%—said they have invested in new technology to facilitate virtual counseling, interviews and meetings. Another 21% of schools are considering making such investments. Among career services offices that have established operational plans for the coming academic year, 61% plan to offer a combination of virtual and in-person services, the survey found. But half of the responding law school career services said they experienced budget cuts between March and June of this year, and 58% anticipate more cuts in the coming year.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250