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?
I joined as a Capital Markets A0 and they've been telling me that I may be replaced anytime now. If M&A is gonna cut down then safe to say freshers will loose jobfaster than usual.
Request to mods to flag such posts because this creates unwanted panic and hysteria, the least of which someone at a A0 level needs.
Khaitan just released a new report on mergers predicting a rise in M and A transactions for the second quarter of 2025
If this the state for M and A which is supposed to be a very lucrative practice, what about other subsets like employment/cap marks...or even disputes
Which area should an Associate join in a law firm then?
It’s oversaturated. Everyone’s competing to the bottom. Clients push back on even basic fees like they’re haggling over roadside chaat. And honestly? It’s exhausting. Here are a few real stories from my independent litigation practice in Delhi that sum it all up:
1. Section 34 petition for a ₹30 crore arbitral award.
Big money at stake. Complex issues. Multiple hearings. I quoted ₹7 lakhs all-in—with instalments, mind you. Still got undercut by someone who quoted ₹1 lakh. For the entire thing. No typo. One. Lakh.
2. Reply to a legal notice—client’s staring down a potential contempt case.
I quote ₹15K, knowing I’ll be pulling an all-nighter, skipping the weekend, crafting it like a Supreme Court reply. Client says, “How about ₹4K?” I declined, obviously, and just gave him some pointers ex gratia—so he could YOLO his way through the legal minefield.
3. Arbitration hearing (March 2025).
Client snaps at me for charging ₹50K for a hearing that lasted 2+ hours—and took two days of prep. His logic? “I can’t lose this case anyway, so why are you charging?” This, right after I got him interim relief. Delulu is truly the solulu.
4. This one hurt.
Spent two months drafting a detailed oppression & mismanagement petition—every comma placed with care. Client never filed it (strategy reasons), then straight-up ghosted on the fee. In another case where I got him exactly what he wanted, he randomly deducted 35% from the bill. No conversation, no rationale. Just… vibes.
I’m not broke. I’m not bitter. But let’s be real—this is not sustainable.
The undercutting, the entitlement, the disrespect for labour—it’s wild.
I became a litigator to fight cases, not clients. Wtf!
It just needs to be cheaper for the client (AI cost), no errors (newest version LLM models have suprising accuracy in citations), and legal application (Also AI). Just enter a court and see how much a judge allot time to a petition and how they all want to just cut to the chase.
As a student you are: (1) unlikely to understand what the day to day in each sub-set looks like; (2) unlikely to have a choice when you start out. When I started, we were fortunate if we were assigned to our city and practice area of choice.
I think corporate still presents the most opportunities and there is a lot of scope for growth, and for the smart ones who want to make partner, find a niche and become an expert over time by investing in your career and networking with industry professionals once you are PA level (which few people do) or become a service partner executing the endless deals of your firm's big clients. But law firms are inherently a pyramid scheme (max number of junior associates, smallest number of partners) so if you're 10 years into your career and not on partner-track, it's tough. In other fields, you're rising to upper management or decision making positions because you're an expert.
FYI mine is a 10 to 6 weekday job, paying 50 lakhs a year before tax -- no rental costs.
Kids, focus on an MBA.
Sorry to sound blunt, but wokeness is a luxury we cannot afford anymore.
I think the best career is actually running a law entrance coaching centre. Say a lot of shit and have zero accountability. Very good money too.
The rapid growth model made sense for law firms initially as they were gunning for size. But at some point, law firms need to stop and think if such large-scale growth is financially feasible. I personally don't think it is. When I joined law firms, a tier 1 would have 50 to 70 partners. This growth in size happened over more than 20 ish years. Less than 10 years later, firms have 150 to 200 ish partners. The rate of growth is insane. The rate of increase in non-partner strength is even greater.
I don't think we will see large scale layoffs, but we will see promotions being stretched out. I mean, we must also accept that something is weird in our system where our newly minted partners have less experience than associates at foreign law firms, both in the west and in the orient.
Having too many young partners sets the course for having incompetent partners. I do not mean they are incompetent in terms of work (while some are), but incompetent in terms of selling legal work to clients. Therefore, these new partners undercut severely to generate a "book" which spoils the market. Developing a book is a skill which takes time to develop. You cannot have associates working 15 hours 7 days a week for 9 / 10 years and all of a sudden ask them where is their book? When law firms do that, such newly minted partners are forced to undercut and get some chunk of the pie which in turn spoils the entire market. This increases financial pressure which trickles down.
Developing relationships in the market, which is a precursor to developing a book, takes time. Firms need to give that time, and that can only happen when law firms adopt a more feasible model. In the Indian context, the counsel model which KCO follows is currently the most sustainable model. However, if other firms keep dishing out the tag of partnership before its feasible, even KCO counsels will run. Anyways, even the KCO counsel model will run out of steam in a couple of years once there will be counsels in large numbers. The tenure for associates, SAs and PAs need to increase at least by 50% to 75%, if any meaningful change is to be seen in the ecosystem. Also, while the tenure for associates is extended, these resources need training on BD and personnel management over the years to become ready to be relevant partners who will not have to engage in bottom feeding or undercutting to sustain themselves.
If we cannot change the growth trajectory for individuals, firms will need to fire people to cull the herd. I do not think that is a solution anyone needs / wants. We need sustainability and not hunger games. But this is a truth, all lawyers need to internalize and not only law firm management.
And the above comment does not even take into account pressure imposed by "tier - lex [something] or similarly named" law firms who have set up shop because they couldn't take up the intense pressure of tier-1s. While much of those firms are shit, many are run by quality tier-1 trained resources. They have the ability to provide similar quality service at a fraction of the price. Big law firm models need to figure a way for sustainability to not lose out on these resources which invariably increase further upward pressure and unreasonable price competition. If culling the herd is a solution, similar law firms will not only rise in numbers but also in quality further complicating the issue. Where exits from one Amarchand Mangaldas gave rise to half a dozen tier 1s, imagine what exits from half a dozen tier 1s can do.
What we have is an industry wide issue. People need a reality check, but nobody wants one.
I know this comment is all over the place but wanted to vocalize a few quick thoughts. Someday, when I have time, will structure this better.
Although Indian law firms have more attrition than Indian companies, many shuffle within law firms for bonus and fancy designations. Not too long ago Trilegal was recruiting Principal Associates with the promise of a Counsel position. Eventually teams will become top heavy everywhere and will have to quote lower prices because the client cannot afford to staff top-heavy teams.