Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP

What would you, or others, like to see changed at employer?
The technology needs to be updated as to be appropriate for the current era and the elevators need to be upgraded.

What were the things that you liked most about this employer?
I've been working here for a lot of years now and the work environment is excellent, the compensation is fantastic, and there are great benefits and raises. There is also an opportunity to move upward in position.

What did you not like about this institution?
While not an ordinary complaint, the elevators are somewhat slow. The environment can get noisy at times. While some of the equipment is outdated, it still functions efficiently.

Career Opportunities:

Compensation & Benefits:

Work/Life Balance:

Senior Management:

Culture & Values:

Length of Employment:
10+ years

What would you, or others, like to see changed at employer?
Show some integrity and be transparent (or at least don't be misleading) in your hiring process. Otherwise, you are wasting the applicant's time, invading their privacy and potentially jeopardizing their current employment.

What were the things that you liked most about this employer?
Not sure.

What did you not like about this institution?
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, I applied to the tax position that is currently posted. I was interviewed by six partners, including the managing partner. At the conclusion of the interview, they asked me if I was interested in moving forward and how soon I could start. Moving forward meant I had to complete a due diligence questionnaire (disclosing my billable hours, billing rate, cash realization history, among other information), consent to a background check, provide 3 professional references. None of these things were problems for me. After I passed their checks, I spoke with the managing partner about compensation. At that point, he said he did not think that they had enough work to justify the position. This was before the lockdown in NYC or PA. I was confused---what was the point of a three-hour interview and an intrusive review? After the pandemic started, the managing partner would not give me a straight answer about whether they were moving forward with me. Only in July was I told that essentially they are looking for someone with a book of business to fully cover their compensation (which they think could be as low as $170K). That's not me (yet) and they knew that from the beginning. To think I almost gave my current employer notice! PS--I selected "former employee" because it was between that or "current employee." As I stated, I was never an employee, but rather an applicant to the tax attorney position.

People, departments, offices, products, services and whatever comes to mind that should be avoided at this institution
At least the six I met with!

How could this employer run its business to employees or the public better?
N/A

Career Opportunities:

Compensation & Benefits:

Work/Life Balance:

Senior Management:

Culture & Values:

Length of Employment:
10+ years

What would you, or others, like to see changed at employer?
Be ethical, be transparent.

What were the things that you liked most about this employer?
Nothing.

What did you not like about this institution?
At the end of a 3-hour interview with six partners, I was asked how soon I could start (with pressure to start ASAP) and they told me the salary range. I clearly stated that I did not have my own business. Then, I was asked to provide references, consent to a background check and complete a due diligence questionnaire disclosing sensitive information (billable hours, cash realization for several years). After that, the managing partner told me we should have a call to discuss compensation and then I could met additional people. We had the call and then he never called me back. Why? Today, I learned that it was because my numbers did not show portable business. Like a reasonable person, I thought I had an offer when I provided the information. No, they were just poking around. According to the managing partner, that is a common thing to do. No, it is not. The common and ethical thing to do is to make an offer contingent upon completion of a full background check. PLEASE---don't make the mistake I made. Don't give them any information until they tell you there is an offer. You should not be required to give a strange firm information you wouldn't give to peers at your current firm for absolutely no reason. PS--I selected "former employee" below because there is no box for applicant or prospective employee. As I have clearly stated, I was not an employee. There should be a way to review a company whose application process is dysfunctional. It tells you a lot about what you are getting into.

People, departments, offices, products, services and whatever comes to mind that should be avoided at this institution
The management because they are misleading in the hiring process.

How could this employer run its business to employees or the public better?
Nothing.

Career Opportunities:

Compensation & Benefits:

Work/Life Balance:

Senior Management:

Culture & Values:

Length of Employment:
10+ years

What were the things that you liked most about this employer?
5.Current EmployeeGreat cultureAnonymous Employee RecommendProsThe culture and environment at Schnader is unmatched at any law firmConsIts still a law firm

Career Opportunities:

Compensation & Benefits:

Work/Life Balance:

Senior Management:

Culture & Values:

Length of Employment:
10+ years