NYC to 200k Forum

[Anonymous User]

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... at-195000/

Any thoughts?

1) Nobody except lit boutiques will even think of following this. There's no way to spin this as market.

2) I think it's sneaky to beat by just $5k a year. Of course I want an extra $5k, but to beat market by a tiny amount just seems like a sham. Why not just let your good bonuses speak for themselves? If you're going to beat market don't just do it by a small amount so you can say you do (I think mckool smith did this years ago at $165k).

[Anonymous User]

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... at-195000/

Any thoughts?

They waited too long for it to matter

[Anonymous User]

Any word on K&S? How are the bagels?

[Anonymous User]

Any word on K&S? How are the bagels?

Trying to schmear their good name?

[NakedPowerOrgan]

21 days after Milbank’s raise announcement, 19 days after STB’s bonus announcement, and 14 days after Cravath’s raises-for-senior-associates announcement, these are the firms that remain:

Wall of Shame for Firms Yet to Announce:

• Kirkland ($4.70MM PPP, 44.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Davis Polk ($3.70MM PPP, 50.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Weil ($3.64MM PPP, 63.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Paul Weiss ($4.56MM PPP, 36.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Milbank ($3.46MM PPP, 41.5% L5Y PPP growth, 2.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Simpson ($3.68MM PPP, 38.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Fried Frank ($2.94MM PPP, 123.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  SullCrom ($4.27MM PPP, 23.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Skadden ($3.47MM PPP, 32.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Willkie ($2.97MM PPP, 43.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Akin Gump ($2.39MM PPP, 54.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  1. Paul Hastings ($2.91MM PPP, 39.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Latham ($3.25MM PPP, 33.0% L5Y PPP growth, 3.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Vinson & Elkins ($2.36MM PPP, 60.6% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  2. Boies ($3.27MM PPP, 20.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Shearman ($2.32MM PPP, 52.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Quinn ($4.74MM PPP, 6.8% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  3. King & Spalding ($2.61MM PPP, 31.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Cravath ($4.00MM PPP, 14.2% L5Y PPP growth, 4.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Ropes ($2.32MM PPP, 46.1% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Gibson Dunn ($3.24MM PPP, 15.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Goodwin ($2.15MM PPP, 42.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Dechert ($2.68MM PPP, 27.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)[/s]
  
  4. WilmerHale ($2.12MM PPP, 44.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Cahill ($3.69MM PPP, 3.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Schulte ($2.56MM PPP, 21.6% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Debevoise ($2.83MM PPP, 36.2% L5Y PPP growth, 5.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Proskauer ($2.37MM PPP, 27.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Winston ($2.16MM PPP, 44.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Cooley ($2.08MM PPP, 39.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Cleary ($3.07MM PPP, 17.3% L5Y PPP growth, 3.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Wilson Sonsini ($2.21MM PPP, 34.4% L5Y PPP growth, 3.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  White & Case ($2.26MM PPP, 32.9% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Sidley ($2.26MM PPP, 25.6% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  5. Baker Botts ($1.84MM PPP, 35.1% L5Y PPP growth, 1.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Kramer Levin ($2.15MM PPP, 28.5% L5Y PPP growth, 3.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  6. Sheppard ($1.71MM PPP, 35.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  7. Cadwalader ($2.51MM PPP, -5.3% L5Y PPP growth, 4.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  8. Alston & Bird ($1.93MM PPP, 12.3% L5Y PPP growth, 1.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Mayer Brown ($1.58MM PPP, 37.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  9. Holland & Knight ($1.36MM PPP, 43.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  10. Fragomen ($1.98MM PPP, 31.4% L5Y PPP growth, 4.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  11. DLA Piper ($1.76MM PPP, 34.1% L5Y PPP growth, 3.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  12. McDermott ($1.71MM PPP, 17.3% L5Y PPP growth, 1.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  13. Katten ($1.57MM PPP, 19.8% L5Y PPP growth, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  O'Melveny ($2.01MM PPP, -2.5% L5Y PPP growth, 3.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Orrick ($1.86MM PPP, 14.3% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  14. Covington ($1.54MM PPP, 22.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  15. Greenberg ($1.63MM PPP, 20.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  16. MoFo ($1.74MM PPP, 18.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Fenwick ($1.51MM PPP, 31.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  17. Fish & Richardson ($1.63MM PPP, 9.8% L5Y PPP growth, 1.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  18. Jenner ($1.42MM PPP, -4.9% L5Y PPP growth, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Baker McKenzie ($1.30MM PPP, 19.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Morgan Lewis ($1.37MM PPP, -11.7% L5Y PPP growth, 1.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)

Legend:
New York
California
Washington, D.C.
Chicago
Houston
Boston
Atlanta
Philadelphia
Florida

[Anonymous User]

Did the Weil raises happen in all offices or just NYC?

[Anonymous User]

Full match by Covington, including special bonus. No hours requirement. DC has officially fallen.

[Anonymous User]

Did the Weil raises happen in all offices or just NYC?

not even all of NYC. just those associates living in manhattan and park slope.

[Anonymous User]

Full match by Covington, including special bonus. No hours requirement. DC has officially fallen.

Flame pt. 2 or can we get a confirm with some extra deets?

[Anonymous User]

Covington match, no hours requirement on the bonus

[Anonymous User]

Full match by Covington, including special bonus. No hours requirement. DC has officially fallen.

Flame pt. 2 or can we get a confirm with some extra deets?

not flame. Uncle Covington really going above and beyond with no hours requirement AND bonus paid on first paycheck of July.

[Anonymous User]

Why don't more associates push for geography-specific raises? Most associates live in cities with ungodly cost-of-living expenses. Why would they want to subsidize the more luxurious lifestyles of associates in cheaper cities? Partners should be on board, because it could save them money.

Interesting. At my firm, and as I understand to be true of other firms as well, the NY office is supported by work generated outside of NY. I agree with your statement, though, and I'm trying to understand why my firm chooses to subsidize the lifestyles of our lawyers in NY. In any event, we're all glad that the associates in the non-NY offices are treated equally to those in the NY office, since we are working on and generating the deals that pay the bills.

I mean, you're already effectively earning more than those in NYC.

[Anonymous User]

Did the Weil raises happen in all offices or just NYC?

All

[Anonymous User]

Why don't more associates push for geography-specific raises? Most associates live in cities with ungodly cost-of-living expenses. Why would they want to subsidize the more luxurious lifestyles of associates in cheaper cities? Partners should be on board, because it could save them money.

Interesting. At my firm, and as I understand to be true of other firms as well, the NY office is supported by work generated outside of NY. I agree with your statement, though, and I'm trying to understand why my firm chooses to subsidize the lifestyles of our lawyers in NY. In any event, we're all glad that the associates in the non-NY offices are treated equally to those in the NY office, since we are working on and generating the deals that pay the bills.

I mean, you're already effectively earning more than those in NYC.

And why does this matter if non-NYC lawyers are just as if not more profitable? Are you saying firms should be treating non-NYC offices as cash cows? Or the other way around, that non-NYC lawyers deserve to be paid effectively more than NYC lawyers because they generate a bunch of cash?

[bruinfan10]

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... at-195000/

Any thoughts?

1) Nobody except lit boutiques will even think of following this. There's no way to spin this as market.

2) I think it's sneaky to beat by just $5k a year. Of course I want an extra $5k, but to beat market by a tiny amount just seems like a sham. Why not just let your good bonuses speak for themselves? If you're going to beat market don't just do it by a small amount so you can say you do (I think McKool Smith did this years ago at $165k).

Susman's raise will not affect other lit boutiques. They have always had more generous comp because their associates bill around 3000 a year not infrequently. associates at firms like kvn and mto can bill like 2000 and can still remain on partner track for a good while.

[Anonymous User]

Why don't more associates push for geography-specific raises? Most associates live in cities with ungodly cost-of-living expenses. Why would they want to subsidize the more luxurious lifestyles of associates in cheaper cities? Partners should be on board, because it could save them money.

Interesting. At my firm, and as I understand to be true of other firms as well, the NY office is supported by work generated outside of NY. I agree with your statement, though, and I'm trying to understand why my firm chooses to subsidize the lifestyles of our lawyers in NY. In any event, we're all glad that the associates in the non-NY offices are treated equally to those in the NY office, since we are working on and generating the deals that pay the bills.

I mean, you're already effectively earning more than those in NYC.

And why does this matter if non-NYC lawyers are just as if not more profitable? Are you saying firms should be treating non-NYC offices as cash cows? Or the other way around, that non-NYC lawyers deserve to be paid effectively more than NYC lawyers because they generate a bunch of cash?

That's great that they're so profitable, really, but I don't think that's the most important factor in setting salaries. It seems like all the recent salary increases have started with NYC firms having trouble retaining bodies, and everyone else just follows along in other cities out of habit. What do you think would happen if, say, Houston stayed at $180k? Would attorneys really leave for NYC?

[Anonymous User]

Why don't more associates push for geography-specific raises? Most associates live in cities with ungodly cost-of-living expenses. Why would they want to subsidize the more luxurious lifestyles of associates in cheaper cities? Partners should be on board, because it could save them money.

Interesting. At my firm, and as I understand to be true of other firms as well, the NY office is supported by work generated outside of NY. I agree with your statement, though, and I'm trying to understand why my firm chooses to subsidize the lifestyles of our lawyers in NY. In any event, we're all glad that the associates in the non-NY offices are treated equally to those in the NY office, since we are working on and generating the deals that pay the bills.

I mean, you're already effectively earning more than those in NYC.

And why does this matter if non-NYC lawyers are just as if not more profitable? Are you saying firms should be treating non-NYC offices as cash cows? Or the other way around, that non-NYC lawyers deserve to be paid effectively more than NYC lawyers because they generate a bunch of cash?

That's great that they're so profitable, really, but I don't think that's the most important factor in setting salaries. It seems like all the recent salary increases have started with NYC firms having trouble retaining bodies, and everyone else just follows along in other cities out of habit. What do you think would happen if, say, Houston stayed at $180k? Would attorneys really leave for NYC?

A few probably would (the COL is high but there are perks to living in NYC...exit options, lateraling is easier, more stuff to do, it's not Houston, etc.) but I'm guessing more would try to leave for another city that moved to $190 like DC, Chicago, LA, etc. And yeah it's "only" $10k for juniors but it's $25k for seniors (not counting the $25k summer bonus), not to mention the signal that your firm is unlikely to match future raises. So that means you're disproportionately likely to lose your most valuable associates.

The same argument goes the other way: are you actively trying to move from NYC to a cheaper city? I know there aren't as many jobs there, but if you haven't ever really tried to, then that tells me you value being in NYC enough to warrant the higher COL.

[Anonymous User]

Why don't more associates push for geography-specific raises? Most associates live in cities with ungodly cost-of-living expenses. Why would they want to subsidize the more luxurious lifestyles of associates in cheaper cities? Partners should be on board, because it could save them money.

Interesting. At my firm, and as I understand to be true of other firms as well, the NY office is supported by work generated outside of NY. I agree with your statement, though, and I'm trying to understand why my firm chooses to subsidize the lifestyles of our lawyers in NY. In any event, we're all glad that the associates in the non-NY offices are treated equally to those in the NY office, since we are working on and generating the deals that pay the bills.

I mean, you're already effectively earning more than those in NYC.

And why does this matter if non-NYC lawyers are just as if not more profitable? Are you saying firms should be treating non-NYC offices as cash cows? Or the other way around, that non-NYC lawyers deserve to be paid effectively more than NYC lawyers because they generate a bunch of cash?

That's great that they're so profitable, really, but I don't think that's the most important factor in setting salaries. It seems like all the recent salary increases have started with NYC firms having trouble retaining bodies, and everyone else just follows along in other cities out of habit. What do you think would happen if, say, Houston stayed at $180k? Would attorneys really leave for NYC?

No, they wouldn't leave for NYC. But they might not start there in the first place. To some extent this is directed at feckless law students. On average, it takes a pretty sweet deal to get some hot shot student away from NYC/DC/etc. and over to a smaller market, so the least they can do is pay the same and argue that the cheaper cost of living more than makes up for not being in NYC. Yes this is an over generalization, but you get the point.

I disagree that this was about NYC having trouble retaining bodies relative to other cities. I think NYC firms have seen a surge in profitability, and given that in house jobs are booming right now they want to retain their associates for a bit longer. And they did so by sweetening the deal. Milbank didn't move because they were concerned their associates would go to Texas. They moved because they could, wanted extra help, and wanted to make a big name for themselves in the process.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "I don't think that's the most important factor in setting salaries." What's more important? We're talking about a market here. Law firms are going to raise to the point that they think they need to in order to get and retain the help they want. Just because it's flat across the board doesn't mean that there's something wrong going on here. If firms in Texas/Boston/Seattle/Denver/etc. felt that they could get by without raising, they wouldn't raise.

Let's put it this way. I work in Boston, which has matched. I would never move to anywhere other than maybe NYC/DC on my own without some extra incentive. But, let's say Hartford, CT or Worcester, MA had law firms that were offering $190k (or close to it) for first years. I'd give that a serious thought! I would need that extra effective comp in order to pull me away from where I want to be. So if Hartford and Worcester start feeling like they aren't getting the help they need, they may try raising salaries to lure people like me away from Boston. But this isn't the whole picture.

Let's add another layer to this. I imagine that lawyers in Hartford and Worcester aren't nearly as profitable as those in NYC/DC or even BOS. BUT, suppose they were, then it would be really easy for firms in Hartford and Worcester to raise, right? Hence why places like Texas have absolutely no problem matching NYC salaries. They want to draw people away from NYC and have the profitability to do so. That's why we have been pointing out that the Texas associates are just as profitable. It's one of the two factors that allows (and pushes) the firms to raise despite a different COL.

[Anonymous User]

Winston added bonus to their earlier match

[Anonymous User]

Winston added bonus to their earlier match

And adjusted mids and seniors. Very important.

[Anonymous User]

Winston added bonus to their earlier match

And adjusted mids and seniors. Very important.

Literally lapped other firms in announcing raises. Wow.

[Anonymous User]

Winston added bonus to their earlier match

And adjusted mids and seniors. Very important.

Literally lapped other firms in announcing raises. Wow.

My friends at Jenner are grumbling.

[Anonymous User]

This thread is dying. Holdout firms, only you can put this thread out of its misery. Please kill this thread.

[Anonymous User]

The holdouts are running out of time. Raises become effective on Sunday. If they don't match this week they officially become below market comp firms.

[Anonymous User]

Any word on K&S? How are the bagels?

A few pages back someone said a K&S recruiting person told him/her there might be news this week.

Edit: post below.

K&S has a firm-wide meeting tomorrow (was already on the books). Wouldn't be a bad time to announce...

Anyone know how this went?

Sincerely,
Every ATL associate

Bumping this back up - surely someone has some info? It's near 6 PM in Atlanta, so this meeting must have already happened?

In the official session, the CEO said that changes to compensation are being considered. Then, offline, one of our recruiters said that we might get some news next week.