Yet more decisions between bad and worse are upon us. The class of 2020 is due to start arriving in less than six months. There's not going to be enough work for them; they should be deferred. But what should the new start date be? Should firms pay some kind of stipend? When and how should the changes be announced?

New start date

One factor influencing start dates is bar exam timing. New York called off its July exam and Massachusetts, Connecticut and Hawaii have already followed. In response, The National Conference of Bar Examiners has said it will offer exams on September 9 and 10 and also on September 30 and Oct. 1. With backup dates now established, more states are expected to cancel their July sittings.

To allow the new associates time to recover from the exams, and yet not have them arrive as the holidays hit, deferring them to January 2021 is an option. There's precedent for January starts from the class of 2009. Figure 1 summarizes the start dates offered by the 42 of the 50 most profitable firms on the 2009 Am Law 100 for which information was reported in the law blog world.

As the figure shows, it was a mix with many firms offering multiple starts. Only six firms stuck with just September or October starts; a further five offered November as an option, and yet five more offered only November. In all, twenty-eight of the forty-four firms offered 2010 start dates, of which nineteen offered only starts in 2010.

If not a success, the deferrals were at least considered to have been the lesser of two evils. Indeed, many firms used deferrals again with the class of 2010. Students didn't love it but delays were so widespread firms weren't especially punished. Opprobrium was reserved for those who rescinded offers.

However, given the outlook for economic activity, having the class of 2020 arrive in early 2021 would probably be to have them join too soon. Economic forecasting is to be approached with great humility at a time like this, but, if things transpired as Goldman Sachs projected in their latest revision, then in Q1 of 2021 the level of U.S. economic activity would be the same as that of early 2018, i.e. the level of two years ago; it is not until late 2021 that the economy is projected to regain its late 2019 levels.

Infographic credit: Tim Schafer

Given this difference, nothing can be read into how quickly firms react. Further, firms who now announce deferrals of arriving associates can't be considered the especially-financially-pressured movers. Those who could be viewed as akin to the first movers in 2008 (Thelen, etc.) are among those who made significant moves in the last 2-3 weeks. There's a long list of such firms that includes Baker Donelson, Brown Rudnick, Cadwalader, Curtis, Loeb & Loeb; Norton Rose Fulbright, Reed Smith, and Womble Bond Dickinson.

The implication? There's no abnormal reputational risk in announcing deferrals now. It would be well received by current associates who'll recognize it avoids increasing the competition for what work is available.

Closing thought

It's tempting for firms to delay announcing decisions about the arrival of the class of 2020 as we await greater clarity. However, we are already past the time in 2009 by which most firms had announced. There's also an important benefit to incoming associates from moving soon: delay weakens their prospects of securing prestigious paid public interest work and entry into elite LL.M. programs.

Hugh A. Simons is formerly a senior partner and executive committee member at The Boston Consulting Group and chief operating officer and policy committee member at Ropes & Gray. Early retired, he now researches and writes about the business side of law firms and does some consulting for old friends. He welcomes reader reactions at [email protected].