Bonus Speculation Forum

[Anonymous User]

STB is out and it's market

[Anonymous User]

STB is out and it's market

DPW management committee sprinting to “Send” button

[SmokeytheBear]

STB is out and it's market

DPW management committee sprinting to “Send” button

I hate feeling disappointed that I'm barely making a third million dollars this year. Like the extra $10,000 that I thought I was going to get was going to do something for me.

Who the hell says "I've made a third million dollars"?

My black grandfather who had to work on a railroad just to afford college would backhand me right now if he were alive.

[Anonymous User]

Today is the day Skadden becomes the new market compensation leader. The New New Deal promises a cheese plate on every table and an 8-ball in every desk drawer!

Nope.

[h2go]

Well, this has been disappointing.

[rpupkin]

Well, this has been disappointing.

Disappointing and perplexing. As was pointed out on the first page of this thread, "stagnant bonuses would be very bad for associate morale." What happened? Do you think this year's flat bonus structure portends a shift to prioritizing profits over associate morale?

[Mr. Peanutbutter]

Well, this has been disappointing.

Disappointing and perplexing. As was pointed out on the first page of this thread, "stagnant bonuses would be very bad for associate morale." What happened? Do you think this year's flat bonus structure portends a shift to prioritizing profits over associate morale?

[TLSModBot]

Well I for one will be implementing a work slowdown to show them a thing or two. They won't get a minute over 2400 hours out of me this year

[JenDarby]

Well I for one will be implementing a work slowdown to show them a thing or two. They won't get a minute over 2400 hours out of me this year

You're going to want to stay on pace ahead of your peers so when they considering raising bonuses in 2020, you're the FIRST associate that comes to mind!

[anonnymouse]

Well, this has been disappointing.

Disappointing and perplexing. As was pointed out on the first page of this thread, "stagnant bonuses would be very bad for associate morale." What happened? Do you think this year's flat bonus structure portends a shift to prioritizing profits over associate morale?

Could this be the watershed moment that prompts associates to unionize? All signs point to YES.

[jd20132013]

Well, this has been disappointing.

Disappointing and perplexing. As was pointed out on the first page of this thread, "stagnant bonuses would be very bad for associate morale." What happened? Do you think this year's flat bonus structure portends a shift to prioritizing profits over associate morale?

179

[zhenders]

I suppose I'm not very surprised, given raises last summer. I mean, granting that it's definitely shitty, I guess I would have expected most associates to assume that the managing partner mindset last and this year (and possibly even next year) would be, "we just gave raises after nearly a decade--so we're probably good to keep bonuses flat for at least a few years." What am I missing? Was this legitimately a surprise this year (again, granting that surprise or not it sucks)?

[Anonymous User]

I suppose I'm not very surprised, given raises last summer. I mean, granting that it's definitely shitty, I guess I would have expected most associates to assume that the managing partner mindset last and this year (and possibly even next year) would be, "we just gave raises after nearly a decade--so we're probably good to keep bonuses flat for at least a few years." What am I missing? Was this legitimately a surprise this year (again, granting that surprise or not it sucks)?

Nah I think if you read the first few pages of the thread you get a general sense of the sentiment.

My assessment of the odds is:

10% - Meaningful (generally >$10k) increase
15% - Nominal (generally $5-10k) increase
74.5% - Stagnant
0.5% - Decrease

Partners have said my firm is having a "very good year" but I don't work at Cravath and I suspect they set market again this year.

bonuses are not moving. let's not fucking kid ourselves

Is gamgling prohibited on TLS? If not, I'd invite an over/under prop bet on bonuses.

I'm declaring lines open at -300 for stagnation, +200 for a weighted net increase, and +5000 for a weighted net decrease.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

The problem is most firms are followers and bonuses aren't really based on firm performance. Even if a firm has an amazing year, if they aren't one of a handful of leaders (firms that pay non-market bonuses notwithstanding) the bonuses won't reflect their profitability. It's kind of silly if you think about it - a bonus is meant to reflect performance, after all.

[SmokeytheBear]

The problem is most firms are followers and bonuses aren't really based on firm performance. Even if a firm has an amazing year, if they aren't one of a handful of leaders (firms that pay non-market bonuses notwithstanding) the bonuses won't reflect their profitability. It's kind of silly if you think about it - a bonus is meant to reflect performance, after all.

Yes exactly. Big law management and big law business model defy any kind of rational business operations or logic. Reality is going to catch up soon. Get while the gettin's good.

[liam31]

Has Kirkland announced yet?

[Anonymous User]

Has Kirkland announced yet?

They don't "announce." They give individual bonuses to people based on hours and merit (in theory) and tell associates individually sometime in December. ATL has to cobble together individual anecdotes to give a sense of where they come in.

One can only hope that another market SHATTER will shame the more preftigous institutions after some blue collar Midwest firm bests their "market setting" bonuses again.

[MillllerTime]

I suppose I'm not very surprised, given raises last summer. I mean, granting that it's definitely shitty, I guess I would have expected most associates to assume that the managing partner mindset last and this year (and possibly even next year) would be, "we just gave raises after nearly a decade--so we're probably good to keep bonuses flat for at least a few years." What am I missing? Was this legitimately a surprise this year (again, granting that surprise or not it sucks)?

The issue for me is that my firm and a handful of other top firms held presentations or sent out marketing-type materials showing how this year was the firm's best year ever (by 10%+). Pretty shitty to rub that in associates' faces and then give the same bonus for the third year in a row. Almost like they're not reading our posts on associate morale.

On the Kirkland question: no, typically they hold a presentation in mid-December and we get an individual email shortly thereafter. But they're usually just based on a multiple of the Ballard Spahr scale, so the market announcement tells us 90% of what we need to know.

[Anonymous User]

when I stopped thinking of a bonus as a bonus and as part of your compensation they hold back to make sure you come sufficiently close to destroying your social life and health then the way they're distributed make sense

[2014]

I suppose I'm not very surprised, given raises last summer. I mean, granting that it's definitely shitty, I guess I would have expected most associates to assume that the managing partner mindset last and this year (and possibly even next year) would be, "we just gave raises after nearly a decade--so we're probably good to keep bonuses flat for at least a few years." What am I missing? Was this legitimately a surprise this year (again, granting that surprise or not it sucks)?

The issue for me is that my firm and a handful of other top firms held presentations or sent out marketing-type materials showing how this year was the firm's best year ever (by 10%+). Pretty shitty to rub that in associates' faces and then give the same bonus for the third year in a row. Almost like they're not reading our posts on associate morale.

On the Kirkland question: no, typically they hold a presentation in mid-December and we get an individual email shortly thereafter. But they're usually just based on a multiple of the Ballard Spahr scale, so the market announcement tells us 90% of what we need to know.

For better or worse it's abundantly clear that law firm bonuses have nothing to do individual firm or even really market performance. They exist purely for retention at this point.

[Anonymous User]

Why is this not bigger news? Cadwalader coming in at 120% above market bonus essentially. 2200 hours is a fairly reasonable bar. It seems like with enough hype this could still have some potential to push DPW or SullCrom up to that level as the market bonus without the billable requirement tho. 18 out of 180 is such a nice round 10%. It just makes sense. So thanks Cadwalader for at least putting it on the table. I know it's not much, but we should push for this!

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/11/finally ... ath-scale/

Abovethelaw: if you are reading this, I say put the Cadwalader story as the cover story for bonuses, replacing the Cravath one. This should be treated as a legitimate beating with no quotes. Although technically for high performers, 2200 hours is pretty common, so I think it's fair to give it the limelight. That's the pressure we need now and give Cadwalader more credit where credit is due. Do it for us associates!

[SmokeytheBear]

Why is this not bigger news? Cadwalader coming in at 120% above market bonus essentially. 2200 hours is a fairly reasonable bar. It seems like with enough hype this could still have some potential to push DPW or SullCrom up to that level as the market bonus without the billabe requirement tho. 18 of 180 is such a nice round 10%. It just makes sense. So thanks cadwalader for at least putting it on the table. I know it's not much, but we should push for this!

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/11/finally ... ath-scale/

The problem is that firms like S&C, DPW, Milbank, etc don't have hours requirements, so they're not going to pay out extra for extra hours.

But I may be wrong. Other firms might not have hours requirements and pay out extra.

Who knows at this point. There is no logic to how this works, as noted several times above.

[charliekelly33]

Why is this not bigger news? Cadwalader coming in at 120% above market bonus essentially. 2200 hours is a fairly reasonable bar. It seems like with enough hype this could still have some potential to push DPW or SullCrom up to that level as the market bonus without the billable requirement tho. 18 out of 180 is such a nice round 10%. It just makes sense. So thanks Cadwalader for at least putting it on the table. I know it's not much, but we should push for this!

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/11/finally ... ath-scale/

Abovethelaw: if you are reading this, I say put the Cadwalader story as the cover story for bonuses, replacing the Cravath one. This should be treated as a legitimate beating with no quotes. Although technically for high performers, 2200 hours is pretty common, so I think it's fair to give it the limelight. That's the pressure we need now and give Cadwalader more credit where credit is due. Do it for us associates!

I agree on this. Who at Cravath isn't billing 2,200?

[rpupkin]

Why is this not bigger news? Cadwalader coming in at 120% above market bonus essentially. 2200 hours is a fairly reasonable bar. It seems like with enough hype this could still have some potential to push DPW or SullCrom up to that level as the market bonus without the billable requirement tho.

Are you tempted to leave your current market-paying firm for Cadwalader? Me neither. That's one reason this is not big news.

[SmokeytheBear]

Why is this not bigger news? Cadwalader coming in at 120% above market bonus essentially. 2200 hours is a fairly reasonable bar. It seems like with enough hype this could still have some potential to push DPW or SullCrom up to that level as the market bonus without the billable requirement tho.

Are you tempted to leave your current market-paying firm for Cadwalader? Me neither. That's one reason this is not big news.

Seconded.