The two most common things on this bowl that disappoint:

(1) people saying what do you think you signed up for

(2) people saying that's why we get paid the big bucks.

Nobody thats suffering actually understood it was going to be that bad. And that's no reason to tolerate/perpetuate the toxic parts of our profession even if you did.

And, we don't get paid large salaries to deal with unhealthy environments. We get paid because we perform a function our clients are legally required to use.

OP - as this thread makes clear, this is why nothing will change. There are enough hardliners to make sure it never will. Any sane person who thinks differently just leaves big law. I say this as a rising second year who is leaving after a very short big law stint. It’s objectively a BS system and the claim that it’s the best source of training is also BS perpetuated by hardliner types.

OP - remember this lesson well. “Quit and do something else.” “Go work in a 9-5 and make less.” Do not dare to question the system, much less challenge it. People from other countries look at Americans and laugh at us for the fools we are. This is why.

This entire thread is the epitome of toxicity. It’s not the “screaming partners” and outrageous abuse that is big law’s biggest issue. It is the quiet acceptance of a dysfunctional norm. In any other business with as high a turnover rate as big law has, heads would roll. Market forces indeed.

No one should deal with abuse but many people on here had extremely unrealistic expectations.

I certainly agree we shouldn’t tolerate the toxic aspects of the profession but we need to have a universal definition of “toxic”. Yelling and abusive personal behavior is toxic but I see some juniors think doing grunt work and working late hours is toxic. It’s definitely unpleasant but it needs to be done and people should be clear eyed about that when taking this job.

I mean, these are nice thoughts. But actually it is part of why we get paid a lot. Being readily available and putting in long hours is a reason we make the salaries we do. The partners who are the ones hired by our clients get paid a lot because the clients think their time is worth it and they bring in business to the firm. They could pay us less, but they wouldn’t get as high quality people or keep them as long. The market for our time is for people to work very hard in high stress environments, and sometimes yes with toxic people. Should we do what we can to fix the toxicity? Of course! But it is absolutely part of the job and part of why you get paid what you do.

You may not have known it was going to be as bad as it is for you - but if it is really that bad, it’s not the right job for you. It might be your firm and it might be big law in general.

I’m sorry this disappoints you. But your post isn’t reality. Things absolutely should change but that doesn’t mean they’re not the way they are now.

I have sympathy on the antiwork Reddit when people are putting in 80 hours a week and scraping buy.

Inexperienced attorneys who complain that big law is “toxic” because it’s long and unpredictable hours - most urgent deadlines are real - is among the most entitled things I’ve ever seen. You literally get paid for this purpose and you’re undermining complaints about actual toxic environments.

Go work in a 9-5 and make less. The job exists for a reason, you’re not obligated to do it.

I've got a bunch I want to say to the comments here. And when I have more time I will. But for now I'll just add this context/clarity: I'm happy with my job. I have a good firm and good team. I don't work too much, even though some nights and weekends do come up. My group supports me in pushing back on unreasonable requests, both internal and external. I'm happy.

My post was not a complaint about the job. My post was a complaint about the number of people that CONTRIBUTE to the bad, rather than trying to help the profession. My post was advocacy on the part of people not currently as fortunate as I am. It's called sympathy (or empathy). Some of you should try it.

There’s a difference between abuse and screaming (never ok) and the people who seem to think they can put away their work phones every day at 6 and never work a weekend

I just said 1 to someone who is complaining about how they have to do grunt work for partners who they think just wine and dine with clients. We signed up to do work for partners so they don’t have to do it. That’s literally what we are paid to do.

I do sometimes wonder if law was always this bad, or computers/cell phones made it way worse.

I have noticed so many toxic attitudes on fishbowl lately. People who say they worked on their honeymoon, people who think it’s okay/what we are paid for to be working till 4 am every night (you can die from lack of sleep and the deal needs better staffing if that’s happening), people who think partners should never manage objectively insane clients…

I’m pretty hardworking and have great reviews and all, but I am consistently shocked by the number of total gunners on here who seem to have no boundaries themselves and expect others to do the same.

OP too many people brainwashed in this country into exchanging their lives and mental health for money. No one is demanding what they should ie. Laws that actually mandate use of time off. That’s why there’s the quiet quitting movement of not killing yourself for your job because it’s literally not worth it. If employers want people who care, they should care. How? Actually promote people using PTO instead of getting mad when they do. If an employer did this, than the employee would be so much more committed and motivated. Instead they get burntout resentful employees who quit.

You know, I think things are really about to change norm wise. A lot of ppl on this bowl like to throw out the “if you hate return to office why don’t u get a wfh big law job” /s. Well, I hate return to the office and the competitive kill or be killed culture of nyc big law and I did find a market paying big law remote job in 3.5 weeks. Obviously not possible for everyone today, but in the next 5-10 years? Definitely. Our profession and the US generally are on the cusp of serious changes in favor of employees. Some people see it as a short term shift based on market economics, but actually, I think remote work opens up lots of possible outsourced jobs (like doc review) and that alone disincentivizes dealing with extreme and toxic environments (but may have lessened effects beyond the margins where the culture is tolerable or the money WLRK level). At the end of the day nothing in life is mandatory, try as employers may to frame thinks like RTO as mandatory, people vote with their feet and with their behavior as to what kind of culture they’ll suffer, thrive in, and perpetuate.

Just repeating what I wrote elsewhere because it explains why I have little sympathy on this issue:

“The job has sucked for a very long time. Yet, no matter how many times lawyers warn law students and those contemplating law school and tell them not proceed, they apparently
can't resist. Everyone thinks they will be the
exception to the rule.”

If you now truly realize just how bad the job really is and you find it intolerable, the solution is to quit and do something else.

OP, I’m very amused by how much people in these comments are proving your exact point. I think people get so caught up in the idea of “this is the way it is” that they never stop to think about how it should be and how we can get there. I often wonder how many great, talented lawyers big law firms have lost because of the demands they place on everyone, not just associates.

I think abuse is way more common than people believe. My issues with biglaw stem from working with insane partners — I can deal with the hours, the fast pace and the high expectations, but not when I’m getting verbally abused

What do you think you signed up for (in signing up for Fishbowl)?

No, you definitely are getting paid large salaries to deal with unhealthy working conditions. Clients only pay biglaw that much for your availability, not your legal talent.

Setting aside some niche specialists, the only thing biglaw can do that the boutique and midsize firms full of talented and bright biglaw dropouts can’t are: (1) staff a massive case, (2) turn things fast over nights and weekends, and (3) serve as CYA in case the firm fucks it up - if biglaw got it wrong people shrug, if midlaw gets it wrong it’s on the person who hired them.

Biglaw won’t change bc is the function they serve and it makes the partners $$. Law as an industry is changing bc this model is horrible for law firm employees and expensive for clients. But that is mostly taking shape in the form of alternative legal service providers and more talent stepping out of biglaw to alternative firm models - silicon legal strategy, rimon law, etc. notably none of them pay market to associates.

Cry me a river.