Career Clinic: US or magic circle?

If you expect it to be crazy at either a UK or US firm you're going to be disappointed.

Associate, mid-tier -21 Feb 2008 | 10:38

Any answers to this question would be much appreciated as I am in a major City firm noted for work-life balance and its "friendly", "meritocratic" structure and I am finding that a lot of this is no more than marketing and myth. I work very hard, lots of partners are unapproachable and selfish, I often leave the office past midnight. So is the US firm "harder hours" thing really true? After all, there are only 24 hours in one day and if you are doing 13 billable hours a day there can't be much difference.

Anonymous -21 Feb 2008 | 10:38

It really is time for all you lawyers to stop bleating about long hours! If you want to earn several times the average wage, guess what - you have to earn it, and for lawyers that means lots of long and tedious hours. The only justification.

Bobby Smith -21 Feb 2008 | 11:31

Difficult to give you a snappy answer because there are so many variables e.g. what your idea of hard work is, your own personal resiliance, what area you qualify into... however, to offer a few answers: yes, it is quite straightforward to move as an NQ. Many US firms do not yet have their own trainees so they rely on newly-qualified movers. It is always nice to see that you were kept on by your firm so if you decide to remain and get 6-12 months under your belt that is a good thing. In today's market, your NQ basic would be mid £60ks. For a US firm, paying 'mid-atlantic' you can expect £75K. This goes up dramatically with those firms paying 'full NY' i.e. £92-94K. There are a lot of valid stereotypes about US firms but I do have clients that pay FNY and can still keep the hours relatively civilised (sub-2000). Of course, the MC will hype up all the worst stereotypes as much as they can but they rarely admit that if you work in a transactional area, long hours are for a client-driven reason and you will be doing them irrespective of the nationality of your employer. An important point when you consider so much work is of a cross-border nature. However, the possible decision you are contemplating really does not need to be addressed for a while yet so focus on getting the most out of the next two years and building a good network of mates in as many firms as possible.

JasonB, Headhunter -21 Feb 2008 | 13:15

Wouldn't you rather make at least 30k more than your peers whilst working the same (pretty long) hours? I know I would. Bottom line: money talks - no-one's a City lawyer to save the world - just go for the most cash. The chances are that you'll be out of law in the next 5 or so years anyway, so pocket it whilst you can.USA! USA!

Associate, US firm -21 Feb 2008 | 16:07

Most people I know who moved to a US firm thinking the hours couldn't be any worse found that they were indeed worse. The US-based lawyers who I know assume they will only get 2 weeks holiday a year and the London/overseas offices of such firms inevitably inherit some of that 'relentless slog' culture. You also have to think carefully about long-term prospects. Until a US firm has really found its London feet, partnership promotions tend to be very hard to come by.

Anon -21 Feb 2008 | 16:21

The general difference, allegedly, is that in a UK firm it is still recognised that you are sacrificing something to work at the weekend whereas in a US firm you are expected to work the weekends. In a US firm you book special weekends off like holiday.However that said I have not worked in a US firm and they are much better b@llshitters than we are. My anecdotal evidence from mates who have done both is that they have done much less work for much more money in a US firm.Also a lot depends on your own work ethic and ultimate ambitions. There are people in high street firms on £25,000 who beast themselves and people in MC firms who skip out early. In the end you tend to get found out and binned if you do that but it may take a few years. You can go MC, US, Mid rank and stretch that to 6 - 8 years PQE then go and do something else having bought a nice gaff with your cash.

Corporate Slave -21 Feb 2008 | 16:27

On balance, training at a magic circle firm will probably give you more options and more flexibility than training at a US firm, so you're certainly at the right place now. Once you've qualified, the City is your oyster and yes, US firms pay more and yes, you probably won't work much longer hours. (Although being kept on is always a good thing so, assuming you are, try to stay until you are at least 2 years' qualified). However, there are other considerations and you need to consider moving with an eye to the long term as well as the short. One key difference between US offices and magic circle firms is relative size. On the plus side, moving to a small office of a US firm can mean you get greater independence and client exposure early on in your career. Having said that, you may not have access to the same level of support and resources you get at a big magic circle firm and you may find you are either overworked or out on your ear because the firm doesn't hang on to extra manpower. Partnership is also an issue: I know several people who moved to US firms a bit early in their careers (2-4 years qualified) and found they worked very hard without any real prospect of partnership at the end of it as US firms don't tend to make up local partners (not that the magic circle makes up that many partners either). This reflects the fact that, in a core department at a magic circle firm you are right at the heart of the business whereas local offices of US firms are sometimes seen as little more than glorified transaction support teams. If, however, you want to make money when you qualify, you should be looking to get onto a front office team at a bank.

Ex-MC Lawyer -21 Feb 2008 | 16:41

It's a bit sad that so many lawyers who have responded seem so short-sighted. Does everyone decide to qualify these days in order to implement a 7-year plan, to milk their employer as much as possible, then get out of the law? I hope an NQ does not get persuaded by what some of the hacks are saying here. How 18K (post-tax) really makes the difference for anyone beats me, when at a MC firm you are already earning a good deal of money even if not a partner, you will have the best training through quality deals and a guaranteed deal flow, and you have the security that comes with working at "head office" (and not an outpost that may be shut down by head office if it does not perform). In the past, US firms have shut their London offices you know, although they would never wish to publicise. You've been lucky to get into a MC firm so stick at it.

May -21 Feb 2008 | 17:08

I think it's a bit early for you to be making these kinds of decisions. You'll get a great CV out of training with a magic circle firm but you are three years and a great deal of experience away from being able to decide for yourself what you want out of the law apart from money. The "worklife balance" stuff spouted from every firm is BS from start to finish. What they all want is hours and as many as possible. To take advantage of all the balancing factors, you'll need 38 hour days and insomnia. Do your training and see how you feel then. It really isn't all about cash.

Consultant -21 Feb 2008 | 17:11

I trained at a mid-tier firm and then moved to a US firm on qualification. I've now been here about 5 months. Best move I ever made. People are great. Hours are great (could be because of the credit crunch though) and money and 'perks' are fantastic. You are expected to be confident in what you are doing and there is less structured training, so if you prefer that system going US is not going to work. The other thing I would also say is that even if the hours do start getting crazier they do give you all the tools you need to work from home which makes a huge difference and you can work from home as and when you think it appropriate (ie even if you're not busy). The corporate associates I've spoken to have said that they have worked a few weekends but again they didn't come into the office. As I worked nearly half of the weekends I spent in my mid-tier firm whilst I was doing my corporate seat, this is a massive improvement. Go for it on qualification, and if you decide its not for you other firms will always take you on. As my supervising partner said to me before I left, "You'll be back in 3 months" As it is, I'm not!

US NQ -21 Feb 2008 | 17:34

If your main concern is genuinely work-life balance then forget both magic circle and US firms. In general, if they pay more, they expect more. Same applies to magic cirle compared to mid-market (having worked in both) - there is a reason that salaries have increased so much, they simply cannot retain enough good people, no matter how much money they throw at them. Let's be honest, there is an inherent conflict between providing a gold-star service and having control over your working hours. Finish your training and work out if your priority is really the extra cash or having some semblance of a life in your best years - if the latter I'd say stay 12 months and downsize or go in-house. There are so many other options.

Anonymous -21 Feb 2008 | 18:08

I work for a top US firm having previously worked for two magic circle firms. The partners at my last firm looked at me with raised eyebrows and tried to impress on me that I would have no life by taking on my present role due to excruciating hours. The reality? Here we are treated as adults. If there is work to be done then you do it. In quieter times you leave early. There is no long hours culture where you feel compelled to be seen staying late just because your peers are as there was in both my previous firms. The support structure is great too. I was concerned by the US firm long hours generalisation perpetuated for obvious reasons by UK firm partners. This may be true of other US firms but does not reflect my experience.

US associate -22 Feb 2008 | 09:05

Having trained at a mid-size firm where a large proportion of the partners had been associates at Magic Circle firms, I would say that sticking with the Magic Circle is a better option in the long term. Even if you don't make partner in the MC, jumping a few notches down the league tables to make partner is much easier from Magic Circle firms than from US firms, which are not held in such high regard in the City. However, if you want to just make some cash and get out of the law in a few years' time, US firms are the way to go. When you go to work for any firm, mid-tier, MC or US, there is no guarantee of how many hours you'll have to work, but you can guarantee getting a fat pay cheque at US firms that you won't get anywhere else.

Anon(ymous) -22 Feb 2008 | 10:37

It isn't just the bottom line salary, remember. The following is usually true - MC: more holiday, better healthcare, more chance of onsite gym, pension contributions, better knowhow (a lot of US firms knowhow is nicked by their UK hires from former employers) better support (PA/paralegal/trainee cover) to stop you going mad as a junior associate. US approach: here's the cash, do what you want with it. Whatever the merits of that, it isn't as simple as comparing salaries. Also... don't forget that you only take home 59% of the salary difference. And the above poster makes a valid point about partnership. You are highly likely to make more money in the MC long-term. Don't take advice from headhunters, they get money if you move. In short - the issue for you should not be one of 'do I stay or not?' but one of making damn sure you find the right practice area for you long-term. Then move if you want down the line, but you're better off doing this post-qual anyway (e.g. MC post-qual experience plays better for an in-house move).

Anonymous -22 Feb 2008 | 12:11

Some of the old stereotypes don't apply to US firms anymore. One key one is that 'they are constantly on the verge of leaving London'. This is true of some but not of most: I do not think Weil, Kirkland etc are going anywhere - just look at some of their key partner hires.

Anonymous -22 Feb 2008 | 18:22

You take home a lot more than 59% of the salary difference if you stuff your pension with it.Amusing how those in favour of the MC tend to stress the training available there.How did lawyers learn their trade before computers and precedent banks?

US firm associate -27 Feb 2008 | 23:12

The problem with working at either is that you will be surrounded by children and dumpy girls, if you want to get paid go to a bank. Now stop whining and CLOSE!

Alesandro -28 Feb 2008 | 16:15

How easy is it to move to a US firm like Skadden, Cleary or Shearman after training at a magic circle firm? Can it really be done or is it unlikely?

anon -27 Aug 2008 | 01:03