Search using our robust engine. Get the recommendations you need to get ahead.
Browse through our expansive list of legal practice areas.
Work where you are or where you’d like to be. Find where you’ll work with LawCrossing.
Use our marketplace to feature your opportunity
Start your search today
Set up your account and manage your company profile
Learn about the company before you apply
Look through and compare company profiles
Discovery salaries and scope your next job
Learn from legal expert, Harrison Barnes
Don’t just take it from us
When it comes to the legal industry during the pandemic, there are a lot of mixed reports. Many are saying that law firms are doing well and experiencing growth in some areas.
2020 has been a year of many challenges and this looks to be the case for many months to come. For those embarking on legal education, the global pandemic is changing the way it normally operates. Those that already have their legal degrees will describe their time at university as traditional. However, this is the year that law schools have been forced to adjust and come into the 21st century. In particular, technology has saved the day for many institutions, as well as their law students.
For far too long, there has been a stigma associated with mental health issues. The stigma kept many attorneys, in high-pressure and demanding jobs, silent about their struggles with mental health problems. Far too many have left the profession, or at least the arena of big law, due to burning out. Burn out was more acceptable than calling it a mental health problem such as anxiety, depression, or any number of other issues that ended the big law careers of many promising attorneys.
Summary: There will be repercussions, good and bad, felt in many industries, including some that specifically affect law firms with Donald Trump being elected President.
Certain salaried employees who are paid less than $913 a week may be entitled to overtime after December 2016!
Recently, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe was in the news again after having laid off two of its 14-member executive staff, apparently to optimize resources and reduce costs. Well, everyone knows that you don’t reduce costs by removing profit centers, but cost centers in an organization. And that brings us to what the recent decisions of Orrick reveal about points of pain in a law firm.
It's been over three years that foreign law schools, in particular the Peking University School of Transnational Law have been seeking ABA accreditation. As Sino-American trade relations form closer ties, the need to increase cross-border understanding was expected to escalate, obviously. At other times, such a gesture by a foreign law school to gain ABA accreditation may have been seen as eccentric, or to be of little significance. However, the recent drop in the number of fruitfully employed law graduates and the tenacity of the economic recession, have made many concerned about the prospect of opening a potential floodgate of foreign lawyers into the market. Whether the Peking University School of Transnational Law (PUSTL) in China ultimately receives accreditation or not is a different issue, but even considering the matter at this week's annual ABA meeting, is seen by some as sacrilege.
After analyzing from all angles, it seems that mid-tier law firms are destined to experience greater growth and stability than their big law counterparts in both the current economy and the near future. The shift, of course, is not sudden, but definitely global in nature. At the end of last month, the legal market in Australia reported that mid-tier law firms were definitely edging ahead of big law firms. The Q2, 2012 Peer Monitor Index released by the Hildebrandt Institute this 27th July affirms the same is also true for the U.S. legal market.
It’s everywhere in the news that the New York City Bar Association is forming a brilliant task force to study the legal job market. According to Carey Dunne, the president of the NYC bar association, the ostensible job of the task force would be to assess whether the weak job market is primarily a result of temporary factors, or whether it reflects a more permanent shift in the law industry. One thing is sure, as Dunne says, “I’m sure there’s no simple answer.” But as a commenter on the Wall Street Journal post mentioning the news indicated caustically, “the committee’s recommendations will amount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.”
A recent Jackson Lewis Workplace Survey that charts trends and developments in workplace law and related issues found that gender discrimination charges spiked in 2004. In the survey, participants were asked, ''Was your company sued by an employee for any reason during the past year?'' Fifty-eight percent of the respondents cited gender discrimination as the basis for a charge, a substantial increase over the 48 percent who responded the same way in the law firm's 2003 survey.
First it was Weyco, a medical benefits company in Michigan, dismissing employees who smoked even while away from the workplace, and then it was Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, located in New Jersey, restricting employees from gaining too much weight. Are companies becoming too intrusive in their employees’ lives?Legally, it depends, says Peter Petesch, a partner in the Washington, DC, office of Ford and Harrison, LLP, a national labor and employment law firm. What it depends on most is where the company is doing business. It’s mainly a state law issue, Petesch points out, and there are a myriad of state and federal laws and regulations.
Some companies are enticing employees to lead healthier, more productive lives with a variety of ''wellness'' initiatives, including smoking-cessation counseling and products, weight maintenance plans, and exercise programs. Companies are promoting everything from a discount on smoking replacement aids and health club memberships to substantial discounts on health insurance premiums.