We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
In the grand scheme of things, Indian t-1 firms are not even in the top 100 law firms of the world and practically nobody outside of law knows about these organisations. I am not trying to be disrespectful, I am aware of the kind of work it takes to build such firms but why are students not aiming for the likes of Kirkland, Weil, Skadden, Linklaters etc? I am aware that in the longer term India is better when it comes to pay but it's another ballgame when you say that you are a corporate lawyer in London. Do people not understand the prestige it carries? Am I thinking too much or is everybody else crazy? I mean, let's face it, nobody would pick a Tier 1 indian firm over Kirkland or Clifford chance if given the choice.
Firstly Kirkland, Weil, skadden, cravath and the likes are US BIGLAW firms which do not hire juniors out of Law school. Only linklaters, hsf, cc and a0 have been. These firms are tier 2 in respect of pay in London. Mostly in 110 to 125 range compared to the 150 to 175 range of the former.
Second, after the new system of qualifying two exams before beggining the tc, u have to wait too many years to begin ur career and also spend ur own money.
It's much easier and safer to work in t1s in india and then lateral in 4 5 years to Kirkland or the likes
NY BIglaw, Other cities Biglaw, then White shoe, then MC. Check the revenues and PEPs. MC firms are equivalent to Indian t2 firms due to work life balance, low pay, good work culture. US Biglaw is the same as AZB or C/SAM, very toxic and toooo long hours, but million dollar pay checks in 7 years PQE.
CC is not US biglaw, it caters to UK mostly. The guy you are referring to who did a VS at Bakers and now works there, had incredibly great connections in the firm, which is why he was allowed into the Open day in his 1st/ 2nd year which is an event exclusive to UK Law schools (prestigious ones).
Also I work at one of K, S and W, and been in NYC for several years after working at Links for some. So I know.
In that sense, Indian Tier-1 is more akin to US BigLaw, larger (relative) mandates, bigger paydays, more toxic, more burnout.
Clean air and infra (India is catching up on infra) is not, in my humble opinion worth sacrificing the above.