Summer Associate Hiring Slowed at Largest Firms
Law firms of 700 or more lawyers pulled back on summer associate hiring for the first time since 2012, according to new data from the National Association for Law Placement.
January 25, 2018 at 03:02 PM
4 minute read
Fewer law students snagged associate jobs at the nation's largest law firms last summer.
New data from the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) shows that firms with more than 700 lawyers scaled back their summer associate classes in 2017—the first decrease since 2012, when large firms started rebuilding the summer associate programs they gutted amid the economic recession.
The average size of the incoming summer associate classes at those large firms last summer was 20, down from 22 in 2016. (Those figures are for each firm office, not the total for each firm.)
“This is a meaningful dip in recruiting at the largest firms,” NALP executive director James Leipold told the law firm recruiters and law school career services personnel assembled in New York Thursday for the the organization's annual recruiting summit, where he revealed the latest figures. “For the last three or four years, we had this bump in Big Law recruiting as they regrew their summer classes. That has ended.”
It's looking like last year's decline in summer associates at the biggest firms will continue into 2018. Those firms extended fewer summer associate offers to incoming second-year law students last fall during the on-campus interview season. The median number of offers fell from 20 in 2016 to 16 in 2017—a 20 percent decrease. The largest number of summer associate offers extended by any firm in 2016 was 565. In 2017, the highest was just 486.
An earlier presentation at the summit by Gretta Rusanow, the head of advisory services at Citi Private Bank's law firms group, offered several possible explanations for the slowdown in summer associate hiring: demand for law firm services has generally remained flat in recent years, with revenue increases coming primarily from rising billing rates. And 88 percent of the law firm leaders recently surveyed by Citi said clients are unwilling to pay for young associates, causing some firms to reduce their rates or simply not charge clients for their work.
Rusanow also noted that some of the work traditionally handled by associates is being shifted to other job categories, including of counsel, non-equity partners, and temporary attorneys.
“The industry has moved away from its dependence on associates,” she said.
The move to $180,000 starting associate salaries at many of the country's largest firms in 2016 could also be a factor in the recent summer associate recruiting slowdown, given that each associate hire now costs firms an additional $20,000 in that first year. (Starting salaries at many of the major firms had stagnated at $160,000 for the better part of a decade before the 2016 increase.) The higher associates salaries also put pressure on firms to raise pay for other non-equity partner positions at firms, Rusanow said.
But the decline in summer associates isn't across the board, NALP found. The average size of 2017 summer programs at all firms was 14—the same as the previous year. The median number of summer associate offers extended last fall by firms of 500 to 700 lawyers decreased modestly from 31.5 to 28, while firms of 250 to 500 lawyers actually increased the median number of offers from 7 to 11.
Overall, 43 percent of firms reported making fewer summer associate offers, while 45 percent reported making more. Another 12 percent said they made no change in the number of offers.
“Some firms have really cut back their summer programs, and some have grown,” Leipold said.
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 AllSimpson Thacher Launches in Luxembourg With Hires From A&O Shearman, Clifford Chance
3 minute readA&O Shearman's Former U.S. Co-Chair to Leave Partnership
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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