Jump to content

Recommended Posts

New York biglaw prospects for students in Canadian law schools are realistically limited to the following: McGill/UofT/Osgoode (nearing the front of the curve with strong ECs) 2L summer recruit. Full stop. 

Is this fair to say? Any alternate routes? 

Thanks! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Genericname101 said:

Start in Big Law in Canada and lateral transfer.

From cruising around lawyer profiles on firm websites, it seems McGill/UofT/Osgoode are the only schools with real (relative) US biglaw presence.

 

Would lateral transfer opportunities still be  mostly limited to alumni of these three schools?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Firms also recruit from at least the ONCA and the SCC. Cannot speak to other appellate courts. Also have met people who (granted, at UT) got jobs post- 2L recruit.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SufficientCondition said:

From cruising around lawyer profiles on firm websites, it seems McGill/UofT/Osgoode are the only schools with real (relative) US biglaw presence.

 

Would lateral transfer opportunities still be  mostly limited to alumni of these three schools?  

No. There's lots of lateral opportunities for big law lawyers. Once you're in big law, nobody is paying attention to what school you came from.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rashabon said:

No. There's lots of lateral opportunities for big law lawyers. Once you're in big law, nobody is paying attention to what school you came from.

Firms must have so many competitive US candidates to choose from. What may be the incentives of hiring a Canadian? What are some key factors (current firm, class ranking, experience, etc) considered by US firms when assessing a lateral transfer candidate? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Canadian lawyers are actually quite well-regarded by American law firms, relative to American lawyers of the same year-of-call. I think the thought is that you get more substantive experience as a junior in Canada.

I’m not saying it’s easy to go to New York, exactly, but firms are definitely open to interviewing Canadian lawyers with a bit of experience. 

Edited by onepost
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, onepost said:

Canadian lawyers are actually quite well-regarded by American law firms, relative to American lawyers of the same year-of-call. I think the thought is that you get more substantive experience as a junior in Canada..

I’m not saying it’s easy to go to New York, exactly, but firms are definitely open to interviewing Canadian lawyers with a bit of experience. 

 

I wonder how much of an investment it is for firms to sponsor a work visa. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to remember that by year 3-5, New York big law has ground their associates to dust. They're not necessarily going to fill their mid-level rank needs (if they have one) from hiring the cast offs or ground down folks from other shops. They can snatch up Canadians who have not already been through the New York meat grinder.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rashabon said:

You have to remember that by year 3-5, New York big law has ground their associates to dust. They're not necessarily going to fill their mid-level rank needs (if they have one) from hiring the cast offs or ground down folks from other shops. They can snatch up Canadians who have not already been through the New York meat grinder.

I can see the logic behind that.

Would the firms get the added benefit of hiring a mid-level lawyer for the cost of a fresh associate? Or does the lateral movement position the associate in their respective place on the lockstep salary structure? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend a year above me at Queen's was hired into an NYC biglaw firm. This person, however, was probably top 5% of the class. I imagine most of the Canadian students at such firms are from TO/Oz/McGill and UBC, but I do not think NYC firms will ignore you almost regardless of school, if you have the grades.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, onepost said:

Canadian lawyers are actually quite well-regarded by American law firms, relative to American lawyers of the same year-of-call. I think the thought is that you get more substantive experience as a junior in Canada.

That would definitely be news to me.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, theycancallyouhoju said:

That would definitely be news to me.

I was surprised (pleasantly) by this as well. 

Please enlighten us with Hoju wisdom.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, SufficientCondition said:

I was surprised (pleasantly) by this as well. 

Please enlighten us with Hoju wisdom.  

No particular wisdom to share, I’ve just never heard a NY lawyer say they believe Canadian lawyers are more competent or experienced on average at any given rank. It would be so out of character I’d probably spit out my morning coffee even if it were late at night. 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, onepost said:

Canadian lawyers are actually quite well-regarded by American law firms, relative to American lawyers of the same year-of-call. I think the thought is that you get more substantive experience as a junior in Canada.

I’m not saying it’s easy to go to New York, exactly, but firms are definitely open to interviewing Canadian lawyers with a bit of experience. 

I've actually heard the opposite from ppl who have experience on both sides of the boarder.

NYC associates work more hours and the frequency of really large/complex work is higher. They also do not spend a year articling (which entails rotations, etc.) This generally translates into more experienced junior lawyers. NY junior associates may have worked an extra thousand hours (or significantly more) on a specific area of law than your average Bay Street lawyer by the time they are a few years into practice. 

On the flipside, I've never heard an American lawyer (NY or otherwise) say anything disparaging about their Canadian counterparts. I think they generally see Canadian lawyers as well trained and competent (until proven otherwise); they know we don't (yet) have any shitty law schools, for example.    

Edited by conge
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, theycancallyouhoju said:

No particular wisdom to share, I’ve just never heard a NY lawyer say they believe Canadian lawyers are more competent or experienced on average at any given rank. It would be so out of character I’d probably spit out my morning coffee even if it were late at night. 

Yeah, these are all anecdotes! But I swear I’ve been told this on a couple occasions—admittedly, by Canadian lawyers in New York.

Perhaps there’s a meaningful distinction between corporate and litigation, in this respect. Maybe it’s just polite self-depreciation. I dunno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SufficientCondition said:

I can see the logic behind that.

Would the firms get the added benefit of hiring a mid-level lawyer for the cost of a fresh associate? Or does the lateral movement position the associate in their respective place on the lockstep salary structure? 

You typically get paid for the year you're in.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Rashabon said:

You typically get paid for the year you're in.

You typically get bumped down a year if you make the move from Bay to NY.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, testcase said:

You typically get bumped down a year if you make the move from Bay to NY.

But your salary goes up to that of about a 6th or 7th year on Bay ;) 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, testcase said:

You typically get bumped down a year if you make the move from Bay to NY.

That seems counterintuitive to me to get dinged 2 years. I've had friends who left after articling to take a NY law job and they got paid as if articling counted as a year. I'd be surprised if a 4th year Bay call was being paid like a 3rd year New York lawyer, discounting both a full year of practice and 10 months of articling. But I can't say for sure as I don't usually talk to the recruiters long enough to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...