Sitting in front of laptops for 14 hours a day, preparing DD reports with the same formats and repetitive comments, and work from home making it worse with just unnecessary calls and deadlines. Is this even practising law? Does not feel better than just another IT or marketing guy's work (except that they have better lives, almost the same pay, better timings and work environments). This would definitely offend the "passionate" and "genuinely interested" corp boiz, but seriously, who are you even kidding?

Everyone does grunt work. It’s called paying your dues. Why would someone trust you with more important and better work if they can’t even trust you with this?

Why do people keep whining about this?what part of this was some hidden away secret that you didn’t know about before you applied? Who told you you’d be changing the world at a big law firm where you’re a cog in the wheel?

Honestly it feels like everyday someone is on here whining about how they hate their work. It’s exhausting to see it again and again. Is this all lawyers do now?
Who is forcing you to stay there? Leave dude. For your sake as well as the firm.

I am from litigation, and it is much worse over here. No Top Tier Advocate / Senior Advocate in Delhi has a life.

They have conferences starting 5pm everyday till 11 PM.

Few seniors like Arun Kathpalia call it a day by 9-10 with Sundays off. But he is probably an exception. World is otherwise filled with Singhvis, Sibals, Rohatgis etc. who work almost round the clock.

Chambers where there is a lot of work, there is a lot of grunt work in addition to the legal work. People from chambers of good standing counsels have it the worst.

You forgot about Gopal Sankaranarayanan. One of the best work-life balance I have seen. Takes every vacation of court off, doesn't appear before vacation benches, doesnt have juniors work on Friday afternoons and Sundays, and actively encourages them to take part in sport and slots conferences to accommodate them. He himself spends hours at home with his wife and kids and spends enough time quizzing, traveling and writing. Litigation can be good for you if you let it.

He was in my class in college - his mother had a law degree but didn't practice. He moved from Bangalore and started directly in the Supreme Court. In fact, very little of his work came from Karnataka. Truly first Gen as far as I'm concerned. We are so proud of him and Raghubir Menon who have really done so well but by continuing to be decent chaps with feet on the ground. Gopal is quite the rebel though - anti establishment whether it's BJP or Congress. And God knows we need more of those.

Don't agree with comments above. I really enjoy my work although I wish it were slightly less stressful but it's okay. Some may not. It's okay to want to do something else. Everything needn't work for everyone.
But spare us the "paying your dues" logic. Have you seen the quality of work and lack of sense in these "award winning lawyers" who have "paid their dues"? Yuck. Half the partners I've seen at various law firms are joke w.r.t. legal skills and humanity too. Just so much greed. Gross.

Guys - can we appreciate that DDs are important for the client - often, what comes out of DD reviews translates into CPs, reps, warranties, disclosures, indemnities - this can even break deals! yes - it is not the most interesting aspect - but we need to appreciate how important it can be and apply minds to the task accordingly.

That’s a good question. I think one thing which many of the “if you don’t like it then leave” types don’t acknowledge is that there isn’t exactly a world of options out there for lawyers. How much can you do with this work ex and this degree? Even if you can, which employer will hire you purely on blind faith in some inherent ability? Going in house seems to be the only viable solution. If anyone has solved for this and figured out a way to actually transition, pray tell. I will format your next 50 issues lists for you.

Same. I too have no interest hanging out with corporate dudebros who think they're doing Path bReaKinG cuTTing EdGe legal work everyday but a girl has got to eat, have money to pay the rent and pay for parent's medical expenses lol. So till that's solved I'll slog, and call it that. Can't delude myself into thinking the work is amazing. Who are these people who find this exciting and why us their life so unexciting, I wonder.

Something I find quite thought provoking - Jesus was a carpenter, Buddha was a prince, Gandhi was a lawyer. You are not bound by your education.

As a corporate lawyer, I assume your skills include ability to digest voluminous information, articulation, understanding a business and its place within the ecosystem of industry, knowledge of finance, tax, labor etc. This would hold up well even in a non legal role at a company. A lawyer could make an excellent manager. You could entwine your skills with your passion for sports or cooking or travel and find a role that feeds both your belly and the fire in it.

Don't assume this is all you can do. Give yourself the credit that you deserve, the confidence and support you deserve. Explore the world and take risks. They do pay off. All the very best.

CAM has increased its pay. So has trilegal. A0s starting out at 16.5 LPA. Is the increase pay worth it all? I'm wondering if people sharing their frustration would now mellow down and be satisfied? Or with increased pay will the firms now make the work culture even more hellish for their associates?

It’s obviously gonna be worse. They’ll be looking to reap now. And 16 lpa for A0s is definitely good, but nothing out of the ordinary. Other professions have it too and with better people and work environments where actually get the time to spend what you earn and not just show off your bank balance to friends.

Late to the party, but still. Get this. A cousin, some years elder to me, BITS Engineering (not an IIT but a pretty solid college nonetheless) + IIM Cal MBA (2 year). Started with Big4 consulting, hated the life of putting out random industry research which the client might not even implement. Left, joined a non-profit consulting (think - Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). At the age of 35, he earns about 30 lakhs per annum, has maximum intensity work for about 4 hours a day, but still hates on his friend who earns 80 lakh per annum in IB and his friend's wife who earns the same amount as a young partner at a tier 1 law firm.

Additionally, I feel that lawyers look at other professions with such enamour, but with such little perspective of the actual job market and working conditions in those industries. All industries are elitist (especially service industries), all industries are suckers for pedigree, and last of all, all industries which pay 50 lakh - 2cr to a 10PQE person (in my limited and possibly incorrect opinion) suck the soul out of you at least in terms of working hours. Plenty of my senior software engineer friends or Big4 consulting friends work 12 hours a day on the regular. I am not glorifying the donkey hours of work, but my sense is that all jobs which are generally more financially rewarding than the others entail longer working hours as well.

And to someone who said doctors have it easy, I suggest taking a deeper look at their profession. IMO, doctors are worse off with longer hours, more unpredictable schedules and a pay way lighter than a corporate lawyer.

My point is, grass always seems greener on the other side. Think what you might of it, but there is grunt work in every line of work, and it takes some years and grit (and pure dumb luck) with grunt work as well, to achieve a modicum of success. While I completely agree that humane treatment is a sine qua non for healthy and happy working lawyers, it is also upon each individual to find value in what they do.

However, to each his own.

Bhai tu Tesla join karle phir... But they won't hire you. Because your skillset is such... Either expand your skillset or consider doing your LLB+joining a law firm your biggest mistake.

It's like factory workers protesting for better wages...

You're where you are because of you. Read that again.

That is legally and factually incorrect. The Supreme Court has specifically included advisory (corporate) to be within the scope of “practice of law”. Seems like you are the one undertaking ‘consultancy’ in the field of law, and not us.

I don’t understand why anonymity makes people spout utter nonsense.