Now-Jobless Brian Schroeder a Scandal for Gays, Latinos, Crimsons, Lawyers
Man, everyone is beating a hasty retreat from association with Brian Schroeder, who set fire to a chapel that contained the remains of 9/11 victims. The former editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review, also a former Duke theater major (wow), was on deferral package from the firm of Sidley Austin. (You remember those: getting well-paid to do pro bono work for a year?) Except now he is not, as his employment offer just evaporated. Anyway, at least the Jews are happy to sit this one out.
Sidley & Austin's ventriloquist's dummy declined to comment.
Let's analyze this: gay, terrorist, thespian, Harvard, Texas, white-shoe law firm, Duke, tattoos, pro bono lawyer and Latino. Needs a DOES NOT COMPUTE tag.
What's the penalty for torching a non 9/11 chapel?
I believe those deferrals were actually paid to delay their start dates, i.e. paid handsomely to not work at all for a year, and not paid to do pro bono.
Pardon, was incorrect on this count–it is good to see that some deferrals were actually for pro bono work, as opposed to just being paid 80K to sit tight.
I do not understand this deferral thing. How does this work? Paid to not work for a year?
From the "Above the Law" blog, 5.09.09:
"New associates heading to Sidley Austin, on the other hand, got 'optional deferral' news. The firm e-mailed incoming associates yesterday announcing the 'Pro Bono Assistance Program': a January 2011 start date with a $75,000 stipend attached."
So, is this actually so that they will do pro bono work or is that just the spin being put on some other scenario that my brain can't comprehend? And thanks for the response!
Sort of. The basic career path of a biglaw lawyer starts with three years of law school. During your first year you try to get good grades. After you start your second year, you interview for an intership for the summer between your second and third year. During your summer internship, you drink a lot and try not to get fired. After the intership is over, you get an offer to join the firm (after you graduate and take the bar – at least a year after the completion of your intership).
Since the process is so long, many firms had outstanding offers to people who were supposed to start this fall that they didn't have bandwidth for. Rather than fire them all, they just offerred some of them deferral packages. Every firm had their own rules to their programs but the most popular version was for people who were supposed to start working in fall 2009 to propose a plan for working pro bono for 15 months and starting at the firm in January 2011. If you were accepted, your pro bono job was "subsidized" by the firm for those 15 months. The going rate was $75k.
I think one or two firms didn't require you to have a pro bono job – but most did. It sounds like a good deal on paper but pro bono jobs are just as hard to find as good jobs and there was no guarantee your firm would let you start in Jan 2011.
Oh, wow. Thanks! The whole field/career/lifestyle is somewhat alien to me, obv.
AH, thanks Tuna, I just picked up yammerings at the bar over the course of the year!
The lawyers on this forum could probably better detail the scene, but many people who were offered positions in Biglaw firms had their start dates deferred when the economy tanked. These days, people just aren't getting offers, but those on the first lucky wave were commonly paid in/around 80K to put off their start date (which is half of what their salary would have been).
What's the rationale for a Biglaw (horrible term) firm to do the paid-deferral thing? I mean, I understand the not-able-to-hire-right-now problem, but why do they feel the need to, like, snap people up and put them on hold. If it's Biglaw we're talking about, it's not like they wouldn't be able to find a long list of equally qualified, interested candidates from later classes, right? Is it a decency/ethics thing–that they don't want to leave out a class or two of graduates?
Perhaps that, but also (or mainly?) recruiting. The idea being that when/if the economy rebounds and firms return to what-used-to-be-full employment, they worry that being known as "The Firm That Cut Their Summer Associates Loose" as opposed to "The Firm That Offered Deferral Stipends" will affect their ability to attract and retain "top legal talent." (In this market, I'm sure any law school 2L will take almost any firm job offered, but that wasn't the case when I went through the process.)
Gotcha.
Can someone wear an obnoxious Harvard shirt with the logo covering 20% of the shirt front and NOT be a douchebag?
If the latest Ralph-Lauren-Polo-For-The-Optically-Challenged with the life-sized Pwetty Pwnies are douchie, the Harvard rendition is Osso Bucco Milanese Douchie.
Props for turning yourself in, dude. That, at least, is not douchie.
And who hasn't committed some sort mischief when they're good and Stella'd that they regret for the rest of their lives?