To Sidebar or not to Sidebar | Value Lawyering | Don't Run When a Headhunter Calls | Associate Marketing | Benefits of Law Firm Mentoring

As seen on The Leopard List and Legally Minded:

To Sidebar or not to Sidebar, that’s Skadden’s question

By David Bargman
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
12:21 PM

As reported in the April 13 edition of The New York Times, Skadden’s Sidebar program certainly is a laudable, and by law firm standards, compassionate, response to the problems of a decimated profession, especially when contrasted with firms trying (and failing) to save face with stealth layoffs. Skadden has come up with a creative and constructive way of cutting costs, boosting morale, and fostering its long standing commitment to pro bono and public interest representation.

According to the Times and firm memos published in Above the Law, Skadden’s Sidebar program permits, indeed encourages, its associates to take a year’s leave of absence at one third pay, no strings attached, with a promise of reemployment at the end of the year. The program had attracted 125 expressions of interest, greater than expected, by April 10. Are the 125 prospective Sidebars simply going off on a frolic and detour at Skadden’s expense, or is it the “option to return to the Firm at the end of that period” promised by Skadden’s memo, that is behind the high expression of interest?

Whatever the reason, Skadden associates must weigh carefully the costs and benefits of taking the Sidebar. The New York Times article of April 13 marveled that only corporate lawyers could be surprised that a program that pays their employees more than most Americans earn to do anything they want for a year was oversubscribed. Consider, however:

• One associate who called me for counseling figured that the promise of a job at the end of a year was a better career move than staying at Skadden and risking being laid off if business does not pick up. This raises the question of whether the option to return, however well intentioned, binds Skadden to reemploy the Sidebars. Must Skadden take the Sidebars back even if it means replacing associates who stayed during the year, albeit at no financial sacrifice? This is not a question of good faith but of business reality. Even when the economy revives and the banks turn on the spigots again using their own money, the deluge will fall on a changed and perhaps chastened profession. The consequences for Biglaw remain to be seen. Clients will likely remain vigilant in overseeing fees; lockstep compensation for associates and even the billable hour may go the way of the dinosaur.


• As a practical matter, Skadden can only make good on its promise of reemployment at the Associate’s option if it has the business to keep the Sidebars occupied at full freight or it lays off lawyers who stayed the year in order to make room for the returning associates. In addition to the obvious, viz., that nobody knows what the market for top tier corporate legal will be in a year’s time, there are several considerations in deciding whether to take the Sidebar. My discussions with Skadden associates reveal that the lawyers accepting the Sidebar tend to be from practice groups that are slow such as Mergers and Acquisitions, Corporate Finance and Banking. There are not many securities litigators or bankruptcy lawyers eager to take a pay cut and lose a year of seniority. A Sidebar also has to face the loss of a year’s seniority whether she returns to Skadden or reenters the job market after the Sidebar.


• The Sidebar may effectively, though unintentionally, discriminate against associates with families or other financial obligations that make the two-thirds cut too costly. While the Times featured the fortunate Ms. Eisenlord who plans a year of whirlwind travel and good works, we do not know how many of her envious colleagues are not in a position to accept the deal even if they are so inclined. One single, first year single associate told me that the tempting prospect of having a year to retrench would require him to leave Manhattan, not one of the world’s top 10,000 problems certainly, but an important personal consideration for the lawyer. The lawyers who stay reluctantly for personal or financial reasons, along with their colleagues who want to remain in Times Square, may be putting themselves at greater risk should the firm need to lay off associates.


• The partners’ surprise becomes more understandable when one considers the career paths and sacrifices that Biglaw, and especially Skadden, partners choose. Top tier corporate attorneys do not work or live like most people; working extraordinary hours under high pressure, big firm lawyers live in a different financial dimension because they work in a different economic dimension. A more appropriate view of the choice facing Skadden’s associates as compared to the average worker would be the anxiety of an auto mechanic in Michigan whose boss tells her that, because of the recession, she can take a year off at one-third pay and come back to work in a year. Even in the unlikely event that the mechanic can afford the pay cut, how secure can she be about her reemployment prospects which, after all, depend on the economy, not her employer’s good faith?

No doubt it’s great to have the chance to make the decision whether to take the Sidebar; but when you think about it, Skadden is not offering its associates a paid frolic and detour so much as a significant and difficult career decision.

© 2009 David Bargman

David Bargman is an attorney and President of Baum, Stevens Recruiting.

Value Lawyering

By David Bargman
January 21, 2009

Far from being a period of gloom and inaction the recession is the perfect time for lawyers to reevaluate their own careers and strike out on their own, says David Bargman.

Value investing is a strategy that seeks out fundamentally sound companies (with strong balance sheets and price earnings ratios) and is becoming increasingly popular during the economic downturn. Because the good times inevitably follow the bad, value investors reason that over time they will be less susceptible to ups and downs and create less long term growth.

Similarly, the demand for lawyers has returned to a focus on fundamentals, such as education, expertise, and drive. Their skill set being their primary asset, lawyers should focus on building value during the down times to prepare their careers for the return to good times. Call it “value lawyering”.

Firms have stopped filling their ranks with lawyers to perform due diligence in IPOs and private equity and, of course, securitisation deals. Proposals for modifying lockstep pay for associate have surfaced and been adopted. Indeed, a recent article on an legal news website cited a proposal by one law partner to return “value to clients” by having junior associates pay their firms for their training until they become “productive” after three years. (Presumably the firms will return the investment should the associates stay.)

Despite the current economic downturn, the fundamentals of lawyering have not changed. Associates with top law school backgrounds, top grades and large firm experience, will remain (if they wish) relatively secure in the top tier of firms and practice groups for which demand remains strong, such as private equity, certain types of structured finance, patent litigation and, of course, bankruptcy. Many others, having had a taste of big firm practice and compensation, will have to retool for the new economic climate of “downsizing” – casting off unprofitable practice areas – and flat compensation. In either case, the buyer’s market requires lawyers to emphasise basic skills and to pay serious attention to career decisions.

Value lawyering – how to do it

Do a vigorous self-assessment:

• Objective (what can you do?): How do your credentials stack up objectively (rank of law school attended, honours, clerkships, etc).
• What are your skills (what are you good at?): Are you organised, analytical, and outgoing? What non-legal education and work experience and skill sets do you have that will help you enhance or retool your practice?
• Legal experience: Drafting, negotiation, research and writing, depositions, participation in trials or arbitrations.
• Subjective (what do you want to do?): What are your career goals and priorities, both near and long term? Do you want to stay in the law? Do you want to maximise your compensation or your personal time?
• Do you prefer a more or less structured work environment? Do you want to be a “headliner” or a staffer? (Be honest with yourself.) Do you like working with lawyers?
• Get the necessary information on what jobs are available: How do they stack up against your current job and your dream job?

A good career counselor or recruiter can aid you in appraising your skills, experience, goals and creating a search strategy. We are not magicians. The good ones give you the tools to evaluate your situation and determine the way forward. That requires you to examine closely (and simultaneously) what you want to do, what you can do and what is available.

What next?

Only after you have done an assessment of your skills, and goals and laid out a strategy (or strategies) should you move forward.

1. Find a need and fill it: specialise as deeply as you can, even in the areas which are not hot right now (like M&A) working on lower profile deals and basic corporate matters instead of fleeing to new a new hot area insolvency or structured finance unless these really appeal to you. For instance, litigators should consider plaintiff’s work which generally is less credentials focused.
2. Use school to retool: Education is a worthwhile investment. This is particularly true of professional education such as a Masters of Law degree in tax, environmental, labour or trade regulation. Even if your prior practice does make you a specialist in a certain field, a degree in the field goes a long way toward establishing your bona fides. Just be certain the area you choose is one to which you are ready to commit. Remember, you have a long career ahead of you.
3. Invest in yourself: If you have always wanted to start your own practice, now, believe it or not, is the time. With big firm training (and perhaps a few bucks set aside), you can offer quality service at lower rates than larger firms, and may snag business from clients of your former firm with whom you have built trust and who appreciate more reasonable fees for certain matters. The younger and less encumbered you are, the more risk you can take.
4. Establish a strategy based on your fundamentals: Your experience, skills, priorities and goals and current, accurate market information can grow your build a “portfolio” that matches you personally and professionally. You can do nothing more important for your career.

David Bargman is president of Baum Stevens in New York.

Don’t Run When a Headhunter Calls

In the jungle, headhunters were after grisly trophies. In the jungle of the legal profession, we only want your resume. While the term "headhunter" -- we prefer "recruiter" or "search consultant” -- often invokes the same distaste as our primitive namesakes, we can turn out to be lifesavers in career guidance. Recruiters are privy to the best jobs, have insider knowledge of the legal marketplace and do a lot of the dirty work that comes with job searches than you will likely want or have time to do. Best of all, we make our living on fees from the employer, so it costs you nothing. It would be silly, then, to pass on a free consultation on your career and the market. So when the phone rings and it's a recruiter on the other end, don't be so quick to brush her off, even if you're totally content with your job.

Here’s why:

A Lawyer's Friend

Lawyers and recruiters need each other and not just because both have less-than-flattering images. You have nothing to lose but some billable time; a good recruiter will help you focus on your career, define you and your position, provide a window to what's going on in the market and provide an outsider's view of your firm. The more information you have, the better. Find a reputable recruiter through referrals and websites.

Even in down times, lawyers should maintain relationships with recruiters because we keep up with the market much more doggedly than most lawyers do. First, there are openings and a good headhunter can advise you on marketing or retooling yourself for what is available. Touch base with a recruiter every six months or so even if you're not looking for a job. You owe it to yourself to keep an eye on your field, and you want your name to pop up when a recruiter has an opportunity you may not have heard about.

Do not get to know the recruiter when you’re looking for a job. Establish a relationship and a comfort level. Most associates don't have time to scan the horizon looking for possible jobs; recruiters can help narrow that search. Again, it is vital to maintain a relationship with recruiters no matter what your current situation is. In fact, given how hard it is just to make initial contact, it's a good idea to pursue a relationship when you don't have the pressure of finding a new job weighing on you.

Maxims to Practice By

Think of recruiters as deal brokers or agents for professional athletes. It is our job to follow industry trends and gossip, so we can fill you in on what's going on. In addition to providing perspective, we can prep you for interviews, inform you about companies and even negotiate your salary.

Play one recruiter against another. If one is not helpful, knowledgeable and responsive, call another and explain the situation. Odds are this will make everyone focus on your needs. Always keep in mind that you have the final say.

Sure, recruiters are in the sales business. But we can only sell opportunities to motivated lawyers. Remember, you have to be sold as well as the firm. A car dealer does not have to persuade the car that the Joneses are the right owners for it.

Take care of your career like you take care of your health. Schedule a check-up with your recruiter today.

Associate Marketing: An Idea Whose Time Has Come

One day during my second year at a midtown firm, I received a call from an executive who had been referred by a sole practitioner I knew. My friend knew that I worked for one of the top securities litigators in the city and this executive was under investigation by the SEC for insider trading. I assumed that the firm would not be interested in any business I brought in, so I told the executive that I needed to check with my partner before setting up a meeting. I asked the partner, scheduled a meeting, and the new client paid the firm a $5000 retainer.

About a week later, I cancelled a lunch with a friend who was a rising young real estate broker because I had been asked to take a law student applicant to lunch. I thought that was more important than a "social" lunch with my friend. The applicant did not receive an offer and the real estate broker, with whom I lost touch, now has his own agency and could have been a lucrative client. It would have been helpful if someone had encouraged my business development potential; but that was not the way things worked then.

When I began practicing law twenty-five years ago, law firms typically had one office, the partnership was divided into rainmakers and service partners and associates were merely the means of production. Years ago, a smart, hard working, likable associate with luck would become a partner without having to bring in new clients and more business. And being a partner was more like being a tenured professor than a corporate executive.

Benefits of Law Firm Mentoring

The following is a news article from The New York Law Journal by David Bargman Esq. dated September, 1999.
Please click on the link below to download this as a pdf.

Mentoring is at least as old as its name. Mentor was the friend to whom Ulysses entrusted the care and education of his son Telemachus while he was away. In essence, mentoring is the process of an experienced person providing guidance, wisdom, knowledge and support to a less experienced person. In time, the mentored person, or protégé, takes on the role of mentor to some less experienced person. Mentoring in some form is a part of almost all cultures. Formal mentoring programs at law firms have a history of success, not just for the protégé, but for the firm and the mentor. Such programs pair protégés with more experienced attorneys in the firm according to defined criteria for about one year.

Since the 1980's programs which pair adults with at-risk youths-such as the National Mentoring Council or School to Work-have grown considerably. These social programs provide training, supervision and evaluation in a variety of parent/child/community or schoolbased mentoring programs. These programs have shown to be successful in reducing violence and recidivism and in increasing and improving rates of graduation and employment. Mentors also report great satisfaction from the experience...