NYC to 200k Forum

[Anonymous User]

Associates at top firms that haven't matched are getting restless. I'm a mid-level associate and HYS alum. I bring that up only because law school classmates have been texting me about lateraling and asking which firms pay recruitment bonuses.

The firm you are at and the firms your friends are at are far more important than your HYS status...

[Anonymous User]

Associates at top firms that haven't matched are getting restless. I'm a mid-level associate and HYS alum. I bring that up only because law school classmates have been texting me about lateraling and asking which firms pay recruitment bonuses.

The firm you are at and the firms your friends are at are far more important than your HYS status...

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone confirmed Brown Rudnick? EMBARRASSING that they matched before WilmerFail, LaTTTham, Gibson Dunn & CruTTTcher, CovingTTTon, Hogan & HarTTTson Lovells, and Arnold & PorTTTer

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone confirmed Brown Rudnick? EMBARRASSING that they matched before WilmerFail, LaTTTham, Gibson Dunn & CruTTTcher, CovingTTTon, Hogan & HarTTTson Lovells, and Arnold & PorTTTer

lol at WilmerFail, but c'mon we can do better than "Hogan & HarTTTson," that jazz hasn't existed since before the recession.

[Anonymous User]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

[Anonymous User]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.

[Anonymous User]

Is DC just staying at 180?

There is no longer such a thing as a "DC market," or any other city market. There hasn't been a a generation. Hundreds, if not thousands, of DC associates at Simpson, Sidley, Morgan Lewis, etc are on the new scale and will soon get the bonuses they earned.

The firms that have raised compete for summers and laterals with the firms that haven't, even firms in their home market. The associates already at "DC firms" or "Boston firms" or what have you see their law school classmates at what they had thought were peer firms suddenly and inexplicably earning more than them, and they see no reason for their firms not to match.

Technically this is true, but there certainly is such a thing as the "DC market" and "DC firms" in the mind of top law students. Wilmer, Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson, A&P, Hogan Lovells, ect.--that's the DC clique, and they constitute a "market" for recruiting purposes even if big New York and California firms have DC satellite offices. These are the firms with the biggest summer classes, the home offices, the most DC-focused practices, the best government exit options, and yes, the most "prestige." Its where the kids at FIP are actually trying to go while throw backup bids at Paul Weiss and Cravath. Some satellites matter more: Skadden, Kirkland, and Cleary for example, create market pressure. Others don't; what the handful of Davis Polk associates in the DC office are making is not important. Comp has never taken center stage in DC: Williams & Connolly is still the top prize despite substantial below-market comp, and Boies DC associates have been making more than other DC firms for years, but its rarely a top choice over Covington or Wilmer.

Gibson's inclusion on this list strikes me as strange when (1) Gibson isn't a DC firm and (2) in DC, the size difference between Gibson and Skadden/Kirkland/Cleary is negligible.

Quick website searches show 218 for Gibson, 205 for Kirkland, and 181 for Cleary in the District. I couldn't narrow the count down so easily for Skadden, but I think it would be the largest of those four in DC. Gibson doesn't really belong in the cabal of the core DC firms.

In my experience, Williams & Connolly and Covington have a special "DC elite" aura among 2Ls, and Wilmer, Hogan, and Arnold & Porter are next up as they're thought of as truly "DC firms."

The advantages conferred by that seem to be pretty meaningless once in practice. I don't think HL or A&P confers better gov exit options than GDC or KE or Skadden. There's definitely more of them, though, so it looks that way. And which has more "prestige"? Maybe the Hogan name carries more sway at a happy hour with some House legislative assistant you're trying to pick up. No clue. But the very DC centric firms carry much less sway outside of DC as compared to the bigger boys. To the extent that matters (and it doesn't, really, at all), it's a consideration if you ever think you'll leave the swamp.

I went to one of the HYS schools and GDC in DC was regarded as equal to, if not slightly preferable to, A&P and Hogan. I've always understood the preftige pecking order to go W&C/Covington > GDC/Wilmer > A&P/Hogan [cutoff of the DC "clique" here]> major DC offices of non-DC firms (think like Skadden, Sidley, Akin Gump, JonesDay) > the lower native DC firms (Steptoe, Wiley Rein) and smaller satellites. This is especially true if you lean conservative as FedSoc types love them some GDC DC.

I’m the anon from above giving the original list of DC clique. This is exactly my point. At T6 schools, there’s definitely an impression of who rocks the DC market, and its not guided by national firms with DC satellites—except Gibson, which is why I included it. Although I will say, at my HYS, Covington was more comparable to Wilmer (depended on what work you wanted), and W&C/Kellogg were above Covington on their own tier.

I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work. Also lol @ picking Kellogg at all unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.

[Anonymous User]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.

Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.

[Anonymous User]

Is DC just staying at 180?

There is no longer such a thing as a "DC market," or any other city market. There hasn't been a a generation. Hundreds, if not thousands, of DC associates at Simpson, Sidley, Morgan Lewis, etc are on the new scale and will soon get the bonuses they earned.

The firms that have raised compete for summers and laterals with the firms that haven't, even firms in their home market. The associates already at "DC firms" or "Boston firms" or what have you see their law school classmates at what they had thought were peer firms suddenly and inexplicably earning more than them, and they see no reason for their firms not to match.

Technically this is true, but there certainly is such a thing as the "DC market" and "DC firms" in the mind of top law students. Wilmer, Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson, A&P, Hogan Lovells, ect.--that's the DC clique, and they constitute a "market" for recruiting purposes even if big New York and California firms have DC satellite offices. These are the firms with the biggest summer classes, the home offices, the most DC-focused practices, the best government exit options, and yes, the most "prestige." Its where the kids at FIP are actually trying to go while throw backup bids at Paul Weiss and Cravath. Some satellites matter more: Skadden, Kirkland, and Cleary for example, create market pressure. Others don't; what the handful of Davis Polk associates in the DC office are making is not important. Comp has never taken center stage in DC: Williams & Connolly is still the top prize despite substantial below-market comp, and Boies DC associates have been making more than other DC firms for years, but its rarely a top choice over Covington or Wilmer.

Gibson's inclusion on this list strikes me as strange when (1) Gibson isn't a DC firm and (2) in DC, the size difference between Gibson and Skadden/Kirkland/Cleary is negligible.

Quick website searches show 218 for Gibson, 205 for Kirkland, and 181 for Cleary in the District. I couldn't narrow the count down so easily for Skadden, but I think it would be the largest of those four in DC. Gibson doesn't really belong in the cabal of the core DC firms.

In my experience, Williams & Connolly and Covington have a special "DC elite" aura among 2Ls, and Wilmer, Hogan, and Arnold & Porter are next up as they're thought of as truly "DC firms."

The advantages conferred by that seem to be pretty meaningless once in practice. I don't think HL or A&P confers better gov exit options than GDC or KE or Skadden. There's definitely more of them, though, so it looks that way. And which has more "prestige"? Maybe the Hogan name carries more sway at a happy hour with some House legislative assistant you're trying to pick up. No clue. But the very DC centric firms carry much less sway outside of DC as compared to the bigger boys. To the extent that matters (and it doesn't, really, at all), it's a consideration if you ever think you'll leave the swamp.

I went to one of the HYS schools and GDC in DC was regarded as equal to, if not slightly preferable to, A&P and Hogan. I've always understood the preftige pecking order to go W&C/Covington > GDC/Wilmer > A&P/Hogan [cutoff of the DC "clique" here]> major DC offices of non-DC firms (think like Skadden, Sidley, Akin Gump, JonesDay) > the lower native DC firms (Steptoe, Wiley Rein) and smaller satellites. This is especially true if you lean conservative as FedSoc types love them some GDC DC.

I’m the anon from above giving the original list of DC clique. This is exactly my point. At T6 schools, there’s definitely an impression of who rocks the DC market, and its not guided by national firms with DC satellites—except Gibson, which is why I included it. Although I will say, at my HYS, Covington was more comparable to Wilmer (depended on what work you wanted), and W&C/Kellogg were above Covington on their own tier.

I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work and lol @ signing up for undercompensation at W&C. Also avoid Kellogg unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.

[Anonymous User]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.

Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.

Can someone explain this "Columbia/Yale" thing I keep seeing on TLS these days?

[Anonymous User]

some columbia grad used "columbia/yale" unironically as a way to refer elite law schools.

[Anonymous User]

Is DC just staying at 180?

There is no longer such a thing as a "DC market," or any other city market. There hasn't been a a generation. Hundreds, if not thousands, of DC associates at Simpson, Sidley, Morgan Lewis, etc are on the new scale and will soon get the bonuses they earned.

The firms that have raised compete for summers and laterals with the firms that haven't, even firms in their home market. The associates already at "DC firms" or "Boston firms" or what have you see their law school classmates at what they had thought were peer firms suddenly and inexplicably earning more than them, and they see no reason for their firms not to match.

Technically this is true, but there certainly is such a thing as the "DC market" and "DC firms" in the mind of top law students. Wilmer, Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson, A&P, Hogan Lovells, ect.--that's the DC clique, and they constitute a "market" for recruiting purposes even if big New York and California firms have DC satellite offices. These are the firms with the biggest summer classes, the home offices, the most DC-focused practices, the best government exit options, and yes, the most "prestige." Its where the kids at FIP are actually trying to go while throw backup bids at Paul Weiss and Cravath. Some satellites matter more: Skadden, Kirkland, and Cleary for example, create market pressure. Others don't; what the handful of Davis Polk associates in the DC office are making is not important. Comp has never taken center stage in DC: Williams & Connolly is still the top prize despite substantial below-market comp, and Boies DC associates have been making more than other DC firms for years, but its rarely a top choice over Covington or Wilmer.

Gibson's inclusion on this list strikes me as strange when (1) Gibson isn't a DC firm and (2) in DC, the size difference between Gibson and Skadden/Kirkland/Cleary is negligible.

Quick website searches show 218 for Gibson, 205 for Kirkland, and 181 for Cleary in the District. I couldn't narrow the count down so easily for Skadden, but I think it would be the largest of those four in DC. Gibson doesn't really belong in the cabal of the core DC firms.

In my experience, Williams & Connolly and Covington have a special "DC elite" aura among 2Ls, and Wilmer, Hogan, and Arnold & Porter are next up as they're thought of as truly "DC firms."

The advantages conferred by that seem to be pretty meaningless once in practice. I don't think HL or A&P confers better gov exit options than GDC or KE or Skadden. There's definitely more of them, though, so it looks that way. And which has more "prestige"? Maybe the Hogan name carries more sway at a happy hour with some House legislative assistant you're trying to pick up. No clue. But the very DC centric firms carry much less sway outside of DC as compared to the bigger boys. To the extent that matters (and it doesn't, really, at all), it's a consideration if you ever think you'll leave the swamp.

I went to one of the HYS schools and GDC in DC was regarded as equal to, if not slightly preferable to, A&P and Hogan. I've always understood the preftige pecking order to go W&C/Covington > GDC/Wilmer > A&P/Hogan [cutoff of the DC "clique" here]> major DC offices of non-DC firms (think like Skadden, Sidley, Akin Gump, JonesDay) > the lower native DC firms (Steptoe, Wiley Rein) and smaller satellites. This is especially true if you lean conservative as FedSoc types love them some GDC DC.

I’m the anon from above giving the original list of DC clique. This is exactly my point. At T6 schools, there’s definitely an impression of who rocks the DC market, and its not guided by national firms with DC satellites—except Gibson, which is why I included it. Although I will say, at my HYS, Covington was more comparable to Wilmer (depended on what work you wanted), and W&C/Kellogg were above Covington on their own tier.

I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work. Also lol @ picking Kellogg at all unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.

No one is talking about litigation specifically, and no one is saying that Kirkland and Gibson are shitty law firms. If you look at the totality of the work firms in DC do combined with the size of the office, A&P, Hogan, CovingTTTon, and Wilmer dominate the DC market, particularly when it comes to salaries. That's just reality. What Kirkland pays doesn't mean jack shit to those other firms.

[Anonymous User]

some columbia grad used "columbia/yale" unironically as a way to refer elite law schools.

I would like a link to this thread if possible

[Anonymous User]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.

Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.

Can someone explain this "Columbia/Yale" thing I keep seeing on TLS these days?

jbagelboy, a Columbia alum who thinks Top 6 prestige matters a lot while also thinking CCN is essentially equal to HYS, claimed “Yale/Columbia” alums have better exit options than everyone else in Big Law. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10314226

[Anonymous User]

I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work and lol @ signing up for undercompensation at W&C. Also avoid Kellogg unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.

I'm at one of those legacy DC firms, agree with you, and think most people agree with you. Kirkland and Gibson are probably on par with W&C when it comes to litigation, and Covington and Hogan are both a (small) step down. I aimed for Cov/HL/AP because of perceived "quality of life" of being in HQ and not working for a NY firm. So far the stereotype has proven true--I have it pretty good.

But if Cov/HL/AP had been paying less when I was doing OCI I would've low-bid them if at all. No question the extra money would've made the difference. At my T10, the DC shops of Gibson, Latham, S&C, even Paul Weiss were all considered just as good and just as competitive as Cov/HL/AP. They competed for (and got) all the same students. There were other people who picked a "DC firm" because of perceived quality of life but I cannot think of a single lawyer I know who thinks their legacy/prestige is worth $$$.

[Anonymous User]

Seems odd that Brown Rudnick supposedly matched but no one on here has confirmed it and ATL has not posted about it.

[Anonymous User]

if the DC legacy firms actually don't match then this "prestige" thing will sort itself out immediately, because every 2L in OCI will know that a classmate who took an Arnold & Porter or Hogan offer at 180 didn't get one from the 190 Skadden/Kirkland/etc. crew in DC and the new hierarchy will set up real quick. T-13 2Ls are the most prestige conscious people on the planet with the possible exception of T-13-bound 0Ls. They will set the order based on cash.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work and lol @ signing up for undercompensation at W&C. Also avoid Kellogg unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.

I'm at one of those legacy DC firms, agree with you, and think most people agree with you. Kirkland and Gibson are probably on par with W&C when it comes to litigation, and Covington and Hogan are both a (small) step down. I aimed for Cov/HL/AP because of perceived "quality of life" of being in HQ and not working for a NY firm. So far the stereotype has proven true--I have it pretty good.

But if Cov/HL/AP had been paying less when I was doing OCI I would've low-bid them if at all. No question the extra money would've made the difference. At my T10, the DC shops of Gibson, Latham, S&C, even Paul Weiss were all considered just as good and just as competitive as Cov/HL/AP. They competed for (and got) all the same students. There were other people who picked a "DC firm" because of perceived quality of life but I cannot think of a single lawyer I know who thinks their legacy/prestige is worth $$$.

Exactly. And the partnerships at these top DC firms must know that. Even if they want to believe that there are meaningful differences between DC-based firms and firms in DC that are based elsewhere, the partnerships must know that their perceived prestige will only take them so far at OCI, with laterals, and with their current associates.

[Anonymous User]

Part of the deal in big law is that you work very hard for very long and often unpredictable hours. In exchange, you don't have to concern yourself with lateraling for salary reasons, because your firm pays you well and equal to the top of the market.

Millbank's first move was almost two weeks ago. And yet some top firms have not matched, though their associates continue to work those long, unpredictable hours.

[Anonymous User]

ATL confirmed munger https://abovethelaw.com/2018/06/prestig ... ssociates/

edited: incorrect TLS burn

[Anonymous User]

LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2

[jbagelboy]

It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.

Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.

Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.

Can someone explain this "Columbia/Yale" thing I keep seeing on TLS these days?

jbagelboy, a Columbia alum who thinks Top 6 prestige matters a lot while also thinking CCN is essentially equal to HYS, claimed “Yale/Columbia” alums have better exit options than everyone else in Big Law.

Thanks for this admirably shameless distortion of an unobjectionable point about the lateral market from a very brave anon. It should be painfully obvious that in no way are two top schools offered as illustrative examples exclusive of others

Ps. In what sense did this post “reveal[] sensitive employment related information about a firm” or constitute anything vaguely resembling appropriate anon use

[Anonymous User]

LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2

Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!

[Anonymous User]

LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2

Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!

the munger move will push gibson/latham, which will push DC

[hoos89]

Seems odd that Brown Rudnick supposedly matched but no one on here has confirmed it and ATL has not posted about it.

Probably because they no offered anyone suspected of posting on TLS.